Thanks for a most thoughtful post. We are in agreement on most points, especially here:
These things will happen. Maybe not this exactly, but something like it. They can be managed, but not easily. The people who have to deal with them have to be ready, and so do we. The dangerous thing about optimism is the speed at which it can deteriorate into disillusionment in the face of normal and predictable obstacles. If we go in with too much optimism, the inevitable problems may have serious effects on our will to carry through with the job.
The big problem is that the solutions run contrary to how I understand this administration to be. To put it mildly, they require patience, soft power, and some compromise. None of which I see in this administration.
> I would love to see a liberated Iraq take the course of liberated Japan.
I can't see this being even remotely likely. There are huge differences between WW2 Japan and Iraq today. Among other things, Japan had an emperor and a leadership that was obeyed and was instrumental in keeping peace. The differences get even bigger after this.
> it might take the path of liberated Yugoslavia.
That had been my contention in several posts prior to invasion. But there is a solution. A semi-self-autonamous regions with trusted (by their constituents) leadership can be forged where the regions are forced into a confederation and the US plays the referee between them until the bugs are worked out of the system.
> Short term, the greatest vulnerability will be to terrorism
I'd say in the short term the biggest problem is finding acceptable leadership for the many factions to create some form of confederation. If we cannot do that, then terrorism will arise.
Longer term the issue is seeing to it that a good constitution is created and respected by all sides. If we play it right, we may be able to sell the idea of a "neutral" regime. That is a regime that is neither pro-Islamism nor anti-Islamism, neither pro-Israel nor anti-Israel, neither pro-US nor anti-US. In a region where everyone is highly in the "anti" camp, neutrality is a good compromise and can lead to friendliness in the future. The temptation will be too great however to back whoever tells us whatever we want to hear. |
