I find it disconcerting that when momentous events are ripe for influencing in a positive fashion and the only catalyst needed is for those in power to pull together for the common good, personal agendas always seem to trump the common good. Opportunities to coalesce for universal gain instead become polarizing events that fracture logic and eliminate all hope for finding a feasible solution space. The good of the many continues to be trampled by the self-serving narrow-mindedness of the few.
And it’s not just in the United States. You will recall my previous musings on the succession of “Days of Whatever” protests and demonstrations, widespread throughout Iraq and the Mideast, though thinly attended in this country. While most of the surrounding countries in this region clamor for freedom and representative government, the Iraqis are on a different mission. They have a representative government but are unhappy with how they are being represented. Too much corruption and too few jobs and basic services seem to be the rallying causes.
The powers-that-be are, individually, going on the record as saying all the right things and occasionally doing the right thing to help reduce grievances. Off the record, they cannot get it together. In terms of common purpose, the only purpose for which there is widespread commonality is self-preservation. If it looks like the Minister of Electricity is going to fail (in this case, knowing he is going to fail) – DO NOT HELP! Keep your distance and throw a few rocks of your own in his direction and wait for him to fail. Maybe even drum up some support from your fellow Representatives to create an artificial timeline for success that you know cannot possibly be met.
The thing is, if this had the effect of driving out the inept and creating opportunities for the talented, we could hope for progress. But – and you won’t be surprised to read this – nobody has a better plan. All they seem interested in is creating opportunities for themselves. With key defense ministry positions still empty, meaning the government is still not fully formed, the Iraqi politicos are already maneuvering behind the scenes to form coalitions that might fill the void should the current government fail. This is not a universal condemnation of elected Iraqi officials – there are a lot of them earnestly seeking to make this democracy thing work. But the wasta (clout or influence) resides in but a few and they are not particularly interested in giving it up via compromise or cooperation.
The point I am poorly conveying here is that, in a country desperately seeking solutions, people in charge appear to be problems. The government needs to act quickly and decisively on legislation to encourage foreign investment, establish oil laws, and empower appropriate ministries to develop meaningful fixes to rather serious national infrastructure problems. This is the root of Iraqi discontent, though the lack of perceived effort to develop fixes is beginning to manifest itself in some of the civil unrest, characterized as government corruption and ineptitude.
Such is democracy in Iraq today. You might argue that they learned from the professionals – the U.S. – and it would be difficult to oppose such an argument given the current paralysis demonstrated by our own elected bodies. The huge moderate middle is concerned. They know what right looks like and what they see is wrong. Political polarization is maddeningly unproductive in our country, dangerously unproductive in Iraq.
Note: I am precisely a month from leaving Iraq as I write this:)
No comments:
Post a Comment