Kanan Makiya

"Without democracy being established in Iraq, and the present ruler being toppled down, the international security and stability of the Middle East will always be threatened, and the Iraqi people will continue to suffer," said Ryszard Krystosik, a senior Polish diplomat formerly charged with protecting the interests of the United States in Iraq. Krystosik gave the introduction to an all-day seminar on October 3 that planned for a post-Saddam Iraq, the first in a series of such conferences.

Following Krystosik's remarks, a panel of Iraqi opposition leaders and American foreign policy experts discussed what type of government Iraq needed and the challenges of putting it in place. AEI resident fellow Richard Perle and Brookings Institution senior fellow Michael O'Hanlon debated the necessity of going to war and America's responsibilities afterwards. Perle insisted that "the only solution in Iraq is the substitution of the thugs who run the place with the kinds of people you see at this table. [referring to the Iraqi opposition leaders participating in the event]. . . Inspections are not a serious alternative." O'Hanlon disagreed, "Looking at this from an American national security perspective, despite the unfortunate consequences for the Iraqi people, [inspections instead of war] is still an outcome that I could accept."

The members of the Iraqi opposition primarily discussed the factors necessary to create a successful democratic Iraq, and what that country might look like. Arguing for a federal, demilitarized Iraq, Kanan Makiya, a scholar at Harvard University and a past convener of the Human Rights Committee of the Iraqi National Congress, stressed the need for American help. He said that the creation of such an Iraq rests on five assumptions: First, the United States changes Iraq's regime; second, this regime change does not entail large numbers of civilian casualties--Iraqi or Israeli; third, the proposed image of Iraq is adopted at a representative meeting of the Iraqi opposition in the near future; fourth, the United States stays in Iraq for the long-term for nation building; and fifth, America guarantees Iraq's territorial integrity.

Today there is an historic opportunity for Iraq, the Middle East, and the world, Makiya said. An Iraq reconstructed as a federal, multiethnic democracy could "become as great a force for democracy and economic reconstruction in the Arab and Muslim world as it has been a force for autocracy and destruction in the past."

The demand for democracy is widespread among Iraqi opposition groups, Makiya said. Despite the fractiousness of the opposition, "it is remarkable that virtually all constituent parts agree on the need for representative democracy, the rule of law, a pluralist system of government and federalism."

The other members of the Iraqi opposition who were on the panel echoed many of Makiya's sentiments. Ahmad Chalabi, president of the Iraqi National Congress stressed the regional impact a democratic Iraq would have. "The neighbors of Iraq are afraid of the vision that has been articulated today," Chalabi said. "They're afraid of democracy. They're afraid of federalism. They're afraid of an Iraqi state which does not proclaim a national ideology or a national identity in terms of ethnic and egregious nationalist concepts. Those fears do not stem from any misconception about the Iraqi opposition's ideas about the future of Iraq. They stem from the successful example of the implementation of those ideas in a country in the Middle East as central as Iraq is."

Yet, creating a democratic Iraq might not be so easy, as panelists questioned Washington's commitment to Iraqi democracy.

Siyamend Othman, an independent Iraq analyst, said: "Iraqis of all hues are both skeptical and apprehensive about U.S. commitment to democracy in post-Saddam Iraq. After all, it's not long ago that it was official U.S. government policy to keep the Iraqi people locked in a cage with their tormentor."

Having outlined the form that a democratic Iraq would take, the primary question that remains, Makiya said, is what the United States will do. "Will the new resolve that America has found in itself post-September 11 rise imaginatively to the level of the opportunity it is itself about to create in the Middle East?"