Iraqi constitution-writing, contd.

60 thoughts on “Iraqi constitution-writing, contd.”

1. RE: the constitution. Did Iraq not have a constitution before the invasion? If so, why the start from scratch as opposed to modifying the existing constitution? Does occupation require “out with the old and in with the new?” Just wondering about the many transitions required of Iraq, how many are really necessary and how many are merely the whims of the occupiers?

2. Judy,
   Yes, Iraq had a constitution, and a very good one at that. The most serious problem with Iraq’s constitution was that the government did not always abide by it.
   Why the need to start from scratch – not just with the constitution, but with everything? Judy, right from the beginning my good friend Rania Masri (who took a strong leadership position in the campaign to end to the sanctions, and worked tirelessly on that project for years while completing a PhD at the same time) said it in the best and most succinct way I have heard so far. She insisted right from the beginning that the word “reconstruction” as applied to Iraq should be translated as “deconstruction and transformation”, and indeed that WAS the plan.
   When people say that the Bush administration went into Iraq without an plan for the post-conquest period they are dead wrong. They had an elaborate and very detailed plan for transforming nearly every aspect of Iraq’s political, economic, civil, social, and even cultural structure. What they did failed to plan for was the one 100% predictable reality – that their plan would meet absulutely justified opposition of varying kinds for all different kinds of reasons, from many different segments of society.
   As my friend Rania understood completely from the beginning, if you are going to transform a country and its society, you must first deconstruct it, and that is why it was necessary very early on to completely trash Iraq’s existing constitution.

3. Judy, you asked an excellent question and Shirin, you gave an excellent answer. I should have couched my argument in those terms, instead of talking about the need for yet another, time-wasting “interim” document. We all know where getting endlessly tied up in “interim” documents has gotten the Palestinians since 1993…

4. Helena,
   “if the government that was confirmed by Iraq’s elected National Assembly back in April took seriously the idea that it drew its main operating mandate from that act of (nearly) democratic political legitimization, rather than from the heavy breath of the occupying power down its neck, then it might rapidly come to the conclusion that it has no need to remain bound to Bremer’s clunky* directive regarding how Iraq’s transition to national independence should be effected.”
   It was clear even before the “elections” that the individuals and parties that comprise this “National Assembly” did not take seriously that they drew their mandate from the voters rather than from the “heavy breath of the occupying power down their necks”. All doubt disappeared completely when, in the week or so BEFORE the “election”, after “meetings” with American officials, the UIA suddenly started backing away from “planks” in their “platform” known to be contrary to the U.S. agenda. It was when they announced that they would not demand U.S. withdrawal that any slight hope I might have held regarding the “elections” evaporated completely. Clearly the U.S. has succeeded in turning the “election” that they were dragged into kicking and screaming into yet another sham.
   * The TAL was designed to protect the interests of the occupying/colonizing power and its allies against potential political opposition by Iraqs. Its clunkiness is, in my view, merely a byproduct of that.

5. “If you are going to transform a country and its society, you must first deconstruct it, and that is why it was necessary very early on to completely trash Iraq’s existing constitution”
   This not the war all about, what the worlds told is regime change not as you said.
   I think no one business to change the texture of the society and the country other than the native people (not the US Puppets) or Iranian background or Al sistani, he should better of go to Iran or Lead from Iraq to change inside Iran….
   So if there is a plan as you stated with your friend Rana I things it

6. Since it’s come up for discussion, here’s an archived copy of the 1990 constitution that theoretically governed Iraq prior to the war. From my standpoint, it’s pretty good with respect to human rights and decentralization, not so with respect to political institutions – I’m skeptical of any constitution that places a “Revolutionary Command Council” at the head of the state and gives it the power to issue laws by decree. If the Iraqis want to use a prior constitution as a baseline (and AFAIK there’s nothing stopping them from doing that), they’d probably be better off looking to the 1958 or 1925 documents rather than the most recent one.

7. Hi Shirin,
   Up front: no disagreements with your analysis, just more sadness.
   Second: You say that “When people say that the Bush administration went into Iraq without an plan for the post-conquest period they are dead wrong. They had an elaborate and very detailed plan for transforming nearly every aspect of Iraq’s political, economic, civil, social, and even cultural structure.”
   That is very interesting, because it goes against the grain of what has been reported about the post-war plan. Could you say more?
   I forwarded your email to some people I know who would have, on the basis of their previous experience, certainly been included in such post-war planning but (no surprise to anyone who has been following this) were shut out of such planning. It should be said that these people would have been reluctant, on the one hand, but also had insisted they be involved in order to ensure provision of basic services which, as we know, still have not been provided. They were politely told to shut up and sit on their hands.
   Who made the detailed plan, in that case? Bush, Feith and co. don’t appear to me as if they would know a ‘detailed plan’ if it came up and bit them you-know-where.
   Also: your friend Rania sounds very interesting. Don’t suppose you could talk her into posting a line or two for our further illumination …. ?
   witw

8. Salah,
   The long term goal for the occupation of Iraq was to transform Iraq economically, politically, civically, socially, and culturally. The idea was to make Iraq into the U.S. base for political, economic, and military operations in the Middle East. In order to accomplish that they needed to make Iraq economically and militarily dependent on the U.S. so that its government would have to comply with U.S. wishes.
   The Bush administration has finally actually admitted that it is building permanent military bases there. And what about this mega-embassy they are planning to establish there? It is more accurate, I think, to consider that a command and control center for U.S. operations in the region.

9. I probably was somewhat inaccurate when I described the Bush administration’s transformation plans as “elaborate and detailed”. However, it is a fact that months before the invasion, while they were still insisting they had made no decision about Iraq, they were busy awarding ato U.S. corporations all kinds of “deconstruction and transformation” contracts involving different aspects of Iraqi life and society.
   Of particular concern to me was the awarding of a contract to effect an American-dictated from-the-ground-up reformation of Iraq’s education system, including everything from reforming the curriculum and teaching methods to writing all new textbooks – all under the close supervision of American “advisors”, of course. The first and most obvious question for me was why not allow UNICEF to continue the work they have been doing for decades with Iraqi educators instead of bringing in Americans with no experience or knowledge of the region, and who as far as I could learn do not even know Arabic? UNICEF is politically neutral, knows Iraq and its society and culture very well, has the trust of Iraqi educators, and would work with them to make Iraq’s education system serve Iraqi needs and interests. I am acquainted with some of the details of the process of rewriting the textbooks, which involved, among other things, American “advisors” with little if any Middle East knowledge or experience dictating to Iraqi educators what they were and were not allowed to teach and include in the new textbooks, and imposing an American vision of what Iraq education should be. In some cases the result was, of course, the replacement of Saddam’s self-aggrandizing propaganda with U.S. propaganda. And that, of course, is the reason an American corporation with no real knowledge, understanding, or concern for Iraq and its society had to do the job instead of the experienced and knowledgeable people from UNICEF.
   Another example is the plan for the from-the-ground-up transformation of Iraq’s once state of the art medical system. One of the reasons medical services have continued to deteriorate is that there was no real plan to provide for Iraqis’ immediate medical needs. The plan was instead to build from scratch a new privatized medical system that was completely dependent on U.S. technology and know-how, and that clearly takes years. The economic and political reasons for this should be obvious, I think.
   The same principle can be applied to the rest of the infrastructure – electrical, water, sanitation, and communication. It is clear to just about every Iraqi who worked in those sectors that repairing the existing infrastructure in order to bring services rapidly back to acceptable levels was not a priority. The priority was building new infrastructure using U.S. technology and know-how, which in addition to providing big short-term profits for U.S. corporations would have the long-term benefit of making Iraq dependent on U.S. good will for replacement equipment and expertise for some time to come.

10. I would love it if Rania would post some comments here, but knowing her she is devoting full time-plus to her current projects and has little or no time for anything else. She is fortunate, in my opinion, to have arranged her life so she can devote full time to “activism”. I understand she discusses some of the issues I have addressed here in a series of documentaries titled Shocking and Awful, of which I have seen only a few small snippets so far. I believe they may be available for purchase online, but I do not know that for sure. I do know they have been shown on the Link satellite channel, which is available in the U.S. via Dis Network.
    Rania is a remarkable young woman – physically very beautiful, highly intelligent, well-informed and articulate, quietly charming in her manner toward all, unfailingly affectionate with friends and colleagues, and passionately devoted to making a positive difference in the world. When I say she is tireless I think about the period when she was travelling all over the U.S. helping to set up groups to fight against the sanctions on Iraq. In every location she was on the move constantly from media interviews to planning meetings to organizing sessions to speaking engagements starting from early in the morning until sometimes well after midnight, putting her head on someone’s shoulder to sleep in the car or van while travelling from one to the other.
    I think if you do a google search on Rania Masri you will get quite a few hits.

11. Concerning plans for the post invasion and deconstruction of Iraq. One has to take in account the fact that the US administration wasn’t united behind a big general plan. There was a fight between the State Department and the Pentagon. In the end, the Pentagon and Wolfowitz won and the State Department was kept out of it despite its insistence.
    I remember reading some reports concerning the way the writing of a constitutional project was given to a contractor. I think that there was one Iraqi imigrated professor who participated to the writing, but for the rest it was mainly a group of inexperimented young jurists who where hired by the contractor. Some ME and constitutional experts later protested against that way of doing things (I think I read about that in Juan Cole’s blog). It’s due to Sistani’s insitence that this text is now only transitional. It was first supposed to be a definitive constitution.
    BTW, speaking of constitution, the article concerning the prohibition of slavery always struck me as being a survival of US history : is there any actual slavery in Iraq justifying the need of such an article ? I don’t think so, am I wrong ? Some forms of prostitution and the exploitation of domestic or illegal immigrant workers are sometimes named slavery, but this is more to denounce the exploitation of these workers than because they are real slaves. Legally, these situations can be fought using the fundamental human rights articles.
    Also, concerning water and energy infrastructures : the US plans of total reconstruction were at the same time increasing Iraq dependance toward the US and punishing the countries who opposed the war by bannishing them from all reconstruction contracts (the Iraqi infrastructures were mainly from Germany and Russia).

12. The previous Constitution clearly did not work. And now has a bad reputation. Who would trust a government under it?
    Meanwhile, the Iraqis blame the insurgency for 12,000 deaths. For no effect, and for no benefit to the Iraqis. Those who fail to deplore the insurgency are anti-Iraqi.

13. Warren W.,
    To the extent that the previous constitution did not work it was because the regime ignored it when it wanted to. That is not the fault of the constitution, but of the regime. By the same principle, the Bush administration’s flagrant attempts to bypass the U.S. Constitution do not reflect badly on the U.S. Constitution but on the Bush administration. One could also point out that the Bush administration’s refusal to uphold its country’s solemn obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, and the Convention against Torture – oh yes, and the United Nations Charter – does not negate those instruments. Instead it makes the Bush administration a scofflaw – one might even say rogue – government.
    No, “the Iraqis” do not blame the “insurgency” (sic) for 12,000 deaths. The so-called “Interior Minister” was allowed by his American handlers to make the announcement that the “insurgency” has caused 12,000 deaths. It is useful to know that, just as before the “elections” Iraqi ministries are still being run by herds of American “advisors” who are on the Bush administration payroll, and by an uber “advisor” who directs all Ministy functions and tells the “Minister” what to say and definitely tells him what not to say. Note that the “Interior Minister” has said nothing about now many deaths have been caused by the American invasion and occupation forces, or by their proxy Iraqi forces, and the various militias, commando units, and death squads that are funded by and operating under American command. The American “advisors” put a very quick stop to an earlier attempt by the “Interior Minister” to provide those kinds of statistics.

14. Christiane,
    Good point about the lack of Bush administration unity on the post-conquest deconstruction/transformation plan. Unlike the State Department, the Pentagon systematically excluded anyone, Iraqi or American, with any level of expertise on Iraq or the Middle East, and only included “Iraqis” like Chalabi, who had been absent from Iraq since he left in 1958 as a pre-teen, and who in any case would provide them only with the “information” they needed to justify doing what they already planned to do.
    The person appointed as the “advisor” to oversee the writing of the Constitution for The New Iraq

15. “Though Feldman appears to have been technically well qualified for the job”
    Why? And your prove for this?

16. Salah,
    Thanks for asking.
    Noah Feldman was certainly technically qualified to advise in the writing of a constitution because he is a specialist in constitutional law, has a PhD in Islamic Studies, and reads and writes Arabic well.
    This information is easily available on the internet.

17. From the WaPo article:
    “Zebari asked the administration to use its leverage with major Sunni leaders, such as Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan’s King Abdullah, to weigh in with Iraq’s Sunni leaders to get them to end a virtual boycott of the political process.”
    I doubt that Hosni Mubarak and King Abdulla will be seen by Sunni leaders in Iraq “as major Sunni leaders”. It’s more likely that they will be seen as “major American clients”, and with reason, I would say.

18. “Noah Feldman was certainly technically qualified to advice in the writing of a constitution because he is a specialist in constitutional law, has a PhD in Islamic Studies, and reads and writes Arabic well.”
    I am not agreeing of selecting him, to me and others I think it is insulating Muslims countries by choosing Zionist to write of their constitution….

19. Salah,
    I hope it is clear to you that I did not agree with the selection of Noah Feldman. I found it insulting also, not because he is a Zionist. I do not know whether he is a Zionist or not. Many Jews are not Zionists, including many Jewish intellectuals, and many are strongly anti-Zionist.
    I object to the selection of Noah Feldman, because it is an insult to all Arabs and Muslims and Iraqis to say that they need an American to tell them how to write a constitution for themselves. It is a way of saying that Iraqis cannot do anything for themselves without an American telling them how to do it. It is a way of saying there are no Muslims, Arabs or Iraqis who are qualified.
    I also objected to the selection of Feldman because choosing a Jewish person whose family has ties to Israel for this critical post shows a complete lack of diplomatic sensitivity to the deep concerns Iraqis have over the involvement of Israeli interests in the invasion and takeover of the country.
    Of course, the reason for appointing an American to oversee the writing of the constitution was exactly so that the U.S. would be able to control the process and determine the final product. There is some evidence that Feldman did not stay in the post because he disagreed with some of the Bush administration’s dictates, and if so that is to his credit.

21. Shirin
    Why you think The Muslim or Arabs having a problem with Jews?
    The Jews had humiliated and killed and suffered mostly by the west the Christians.
    The problem it

22. Salah `Azizi,
    We do not need to talk about this. Everything you said about the Jews and especially the Iraqi Jews I know very well, and I agree with you completely. I knew a lot of Jews in Iraq too. With some I did business, with others I shared recreational interests and we had many pleasant times together. Like your father I think Iraq lost a lot when the Jews left after 1948. They were there for thousands of years, and they were part of the land of Iraq, so Iraq has lost a big piece of itself with them gone.

23. Shirin
    The I can not understand why this rush for the writing of a constitution.
    when US invaded Iraq first singe of acceptance was the military troops not fights the US (excluded the republican Guards and all the intelligences and very closed circle of grads and official to the regime) then the Iraq were in big Shook & owe State which left them unguided what I think the most important thinks that Us as occupied force at that time is start very soon to restore all the public services and facilities for the Iraqi, I like to tell you that most of Iraqi specially the groups live outside Iraq we all thought Iraq will be better country in ME and we put as staring example Abu Dhabi City – Capital of the United Arab Emirates but Iraq have the potent ional in pupils and resources much more that UAE.
    But all these dreams went out as the looting started and Ramsfield came publicly say see the freedom! Which freedom he taking about these are criminals we knew that will happened Iraq had same experience this in 1991, they loot the hospitals schools, and government offices and put on fire most of the birth certificate and land registering offices and building, which in the west use it as Shia

24. The conversation between Shirin and Salah about whether an otherwise qualified person is a good choice based on ethnicity and family ties is a gem. It interleaves the “some of my best friends are Jews” commonplace, mixes the father, the old country, and the emotional longings for the Jews that somehow all of a sudden left. Just like Abraham, they heard a voice and left.
    I wonder if we should turn the tables and call the placement of Mohammed El Baradei lacking diplomatic sensitivity.
    Salah, calling Zionist people sick is bad form, it is not conducive to an informed exchange, and is probably against the stated spirit of this blog.
    Oh, and when you get a chance Salah, could you share with us a copy of the Knesset map that you mentioned shows Israel extending to the Nile river? If you cannot maybe that is an example of the flawed Iraqi education the Americans are trying to fix.
    David

25. Well, David, predictably you have gotten your tender Jewish sensibilities all in a bunch over our discussion about the appropriateness of the Bush administration appointing a Jewish American to oversee the writing of the constitution of a Muslim Arab state.
    And of course, if the world community should one day decide it was time Israel had a constitution, and appointed a Muslim Arab to oversee the process, you would find that quite appropriate and accept it without a peep of protest, wouldn’t you, David?

26. “Iraqi Campaign for a Democratic Constitution Launched in London”
    Go to: http://www.iraqcp.org/members3/0050606wicp.htm

28. David’s point about El-Baradei is particularly hilarious since Israel is one of the few states in the world that hasn’t signed the NPT and therefore doesn’t come under the insepctions regime of the IAEA. So what is your beef exactly, David?

29. And of course, if the world community should one day decide it was time Israel had a constitution, and appointed a Muslim Arab to oversee the process, you would find that quite appropriate and accept it without a peep of protest, wouldn’t you, David?
    I’m not David, but in my case, that would depend on the Arab Muslim in question. For instance, if the constitutional advisor were Cherif Bassiouni or some other respected law professor without notable anti-Israel bias, and if the Israeli legislature and/or electorate had the final say, I wouldn’t object to him on ethnic or religious grounds. Certainly, in the unlikely event that Israel were to find itself in this situation, I wouldn’t be making bigoted statements about someone like Bassiouni being disqualified for ethnic reasons – and from what I know of Feldman, he’s an exact equivalent to what Bassiouni would be vis-a-vis Israel.
    BTW, you may want to reconsider that “tender Jewish sensibilities” comment.

30. Before it gets too hot in here, I wanted to throw my $.02 in about the original complaint, which also touches on a pet peeve of mine (see, we’ve all got ’em).
    Shirin’s complaint, as I understood it, was about Feldman’s role, not Feldman, and I think the same complaint would be made in Jonathan’s hypothetical case with Bassiouni. It’s not a bad thing to get the best technical advice available, from whoever, especially when you

31. Shirin,
    If I had been in charge of the

33. Salah,
    Where is the map? Were you lying? Or your mentors lied to you when they tought you in your great Iraqi educational system that Israel claims the lands between the Nile and Euphrates?
    You keep asking for proof and evidence for every statement. Now it is your turn to put up or shut up.
    David

34. Helena,
    There is no beef. The exchange between Salah and Shirin was so enlightening that I am printing and framing it, so I can show around what their educated moderates think.
    Great blog!
    David

35. Shirin,
    I thought Israel already had multiple Muslim and Christian Arabs involved in the process of law making. Indeed, they are members of the so called Knesset. Yep, the place Salah owes us the incriminating map with Israel spanning the seven seas.
    Did they also hide this in your Iraqi school system? Don’t they study the geopilitics of the region they live in?
    David

36. “There is no beef. The exchange between Salah and Shirin was so enlightening that I am printing and framing it, so I can show around what their educated moderates think.”
    Hmm..I wonder what the conversation might be like between two Jewish Israelis discussing the fact that a Muslim Arab American with family ties to Syria had been chosen by America to “oversee” the writing of their constitution?
    I wonder if it would be as moderate (or not as you see it) as Shirin and Salah’s conversation? Perhaps, perhaps not.
    And David, there is a big difference between being a member of the Knesset and overseeing the writing of this hypothetical Israeli constitution.

37. “Israeli Parliament there is a statue of Theodor Herzl. This Zionist who lived 100 years ago in Vienna and started founding the Israel project has drawn the map of the territories that Israel has to conquer and in this map a great part of Turkey’s territories have been shown as part of Israel. The Israel project is in this fact. In the Old Testament it is said that the land of the Assyrians which goes until Kayseri belongs to Israel. The West if necessary can close its eyes to this project of Israel.”
    http://cemoti.revues.org/document590.html#tocto3

38. Jonathan,
    Perhaps you WOULD be just fine having an Arab Muslim put in charge of writing Israel’s constitution, but I hope you will forgive me if I wonder whether you would be quite so comfortable with the reality as you are with using it as an argument to dismiss Iraqi and Arab concerns. If so, I do not doubt that you would be a member of a very, very tiny minority.
    And no, with all respect to you, I will not reconsider my Jewish sensibilities remark. I especially will not reconsider it as long as those who regularly wave their Jewish sensibilities in our faces continue to dismiss Arab sensibilities as invalid and utterly unworthy of consideration. I am afraid, Jonathan, that in light of your comments on this page that group includes you at least in this particular case.

39. For the record (or, “back when I said ‘I have no doubt’, well, um, I started to have doubts”);
    It looks like on the basis of Feldman’s interviews (Frontline, Oct ’03 & Mother Jones, Jan ’05) that he was not appointed to oversee the writing of the constitution. He was in Iraq from late April ’03 to July ’03 under contract to the US under Garner, then Bremer, to help set up the committee and the process. After the constitutional committe was formed in July his contract was up and he stayed on to work with the committee pro-bono.
    An interesting excerpt from the MJ interview:
    MJ.com: Now tell me about drafting a constitution

40. Sorry, I meant to include the links to those bookend interviews;
    Frontline: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/stake/feldman.html
    Mother Jones:
    http://www.motherjones.com/news/qa/2005/01/feldman.html

41. Wind– thanks for digging up those great contributions to the field of “Feldmanology”, and the links.
    It’s interesting how he characterizes (according to your rendering of this) his transition from working as a contractor for the State Department setting up the process and the TAL’s “drafting committee” to working “pro bono” as a consultant directly to the committee itself.
    It would be interesting to know whether his shift from one role to the other was quite clear to the Iraqis involved?
    It seems to me that while many of his political instinct, as revealed in the MoJo interview as elsewhere, were probably quite laudable, at a bigger level his understanding of the contradictions and hypocrisies inevitably involved in any practice of “liberal imperialism” seems extremely limited.
    Of course, he probably didn’t see himself as involved in the practice of “liberal imperialism”. He probably saw his role in fairly heroic terms as analogous to that played by the people who ran the post-WW2 occupations in Germany or Japan.
    Many, many Americans made that fundamental mistake in their understanding of the role of the US venture in Iraq, which they saw (WW-2-like) as being the result of good-faith participation in a project of “just war”. It never was. The project was one of naked colonial aggression from the get-go, and that has affected everything to do with the venture ever since.

42. Salah,
    Show us the map.
    So far your attempt to salvage your claim is sad, a reference to a statue somehow connected to the Old Testament and now claiming Turkey as well.
    Wake up Salah, Israel is the second smallest country in the entire Middle East. Is that an expanding empire?
    Retracting a mistake or apologizing for the insults that Shirin and you have written are generally useful for a dialogue. Assuming you are interested in dialogue with anybody that doesn’t share your conspiratorial views.
    David

43. We all have learned very clearly what the word “advisor” means in the context of the American program in Iraq. In short, the American “advisors” are the ones making the decisions, and the Iraqis are ordered to carry them out.
    As for Feldman, his original role was most certainly NOT limited to merely “setting up the committee and the process”, and I submit that someone with his technical qualifications was not needed if that was the sum total of the role.
    I don’t have time to write more about this now, but I hope to later.

44. “Israel is the second smallest country in the entire Middle East.”
    Oddly enough, that does not seem to stop it from being the most predatory country in the entire Middle East. It does not stop it from continuing to demolish more and more and more Palestinian homes and businesses, uproot more and more and more and more Palestinian trees, plough up more and more and more Palestinian agricultural fields, do more and more and more to destroy Palestinian livelihood and life, and, of course, confiscate more and more and more Palestinian land.

45. Perhaps you WOULD be just fine having an Arab Muslim put in charge of writing Israel’s constitution, but I hope you will forgive me if I wonder whether you would be quite so comfortable with the reality as you are with using it as an argument to dismiss Iraqi and Arab concerns.
    Personally, I would count Israel very lucky if someone like Bassiouni were available to cut through all the bickering. If you want a less hypothetical example, though, there are those in Israel who argue that Arab citizens shouldn’t have a deciding voice in policy matters and that government decisions aren’t “legitimate” if Arab votes provide the margin. This argument was made by some people on the far right earlier this year after the government survived a vote of confidence thanks to Ra’am (the United Arab List). In the past I have not hesitated to condemn such views as racist and I do so now.
    I especially will not reconsider it as long as those who regularly wave their Jewish sensibilities in our faces continue to dismiss Arab sensibilities as . I am afraid, Jonathan, that in light of your comments on this page that group includes you at least in this particular case.
    Again with all respect, I’m not sure where I’m doing that. I do, indeed, think that any sensibility that disqualifies a person from a political role on grounds of religious, ethnic or national origin is “invalid and utterly unworthy of consideration.” However, I don’t only think so if it’s an Arab sensibility. I reject the same sensibility in anyone else including Israelis and Jews, and I’ve said so to Israelis and Jews.
    If you had objected to Feldman solely on the ground that he was a foreigner imposed by an occupying power and that a non-Iraqi has no business writing a constitution for Iraq, I would have agreed with you. Once you brought his religion and ethnic origin into it, though, that was a different story. His appointment may have been politically unwise, but it was no more morally objectionable than that of any other non-Iraqi.

46. Jonathan,
    1. I would not say that you are one of those who constantly wave your delicate Jewish sensibilities in our faces, demanding at all times utmost respect and consideration for them, and thank you for that. You most certainly HAVE, however, summarily dismissed our Arab/Iraqi sensibilities in the matter of the Bush administration’s choice of a Jewish American with family ties to Israel to direct/oversee/supervise/”advise” (choose your verb) the writing of the Iraqi constitution in the wake of an invasion and occupation that is rightfully perceived as having been driven at least partially by Israeli interests.
    2. You are, in the tiresome, typical American manner attempting to impose on Iraqis an American sensibility that simply does not apply there, particularly under the current set of circumstances.
    Like it or not, Zionism and Israel, and the U.S.’s persistent one-sided involvement have had an impact that you ignore at your peril. Like it or not, the significant involvement of Israeli interests in the Bush administration’s Iraq adventure has created both realistic and unrealistic concerns about Israel’s true role that are so pervasive as to be virtually universal.
    You can label this as racism, anti-semitism or any other ism you like. In reality it is a perfectly rational reaction to the fact that 1. Israel is and always has been an enemy state, 2. By its own self-definition, Israel is “The Jewish State” for all the Jews of the world, 3. By the perception of most of the people of the world, and certainly most of the Arab people of the world, most if not all Jews in the world are loyal to and support The Jewish State of Israel.
    3. “it was no more morally objectionable”
    Where and when, please, did I ever, EVER state, or imply or even hint anything about the choice of a Jew being morally objectionable?

47. “Israel is the second smallest country in the entire Middle East. Is that an expanding empire?”
    Can you give us the borders for Israel in 1948 accordiny to UN order at that time?
    Give us the borders of Israel on 1967?
    Give us borders of Israel on 2005?
    Give us the borders of Israel on 2055?!!!!

48. Helena,
    I do wonder whether the transition was clear to the Iraqis working on the constitution. The 2005 interview indicates Feldman felt some friction (if I read between the line properly, personal/organization friction and not just conflicting objectives) between US efforts and what he was doing. If that was the case, I imagine the US side would have made Feldman’s status known to them.
    And agreed about the chasm between conceptualization of personal role v. the whole enterprise. Actually, I met alot of Americans enroute to Iraq about the same time Feldman would have ended his contract, rolling in with the Bremer regime. Some were the same kind we saw in Afghanistan; young, inexperienced, out on an adventure, certainly overpaid, and maybe even angling for future political position back home. Others really thought they had been picked to go help Iraqis rebuild their country (their words, not mine). Their inability to apprehend the whole picture and see what might be coming was not uncommon.
    It’s difficult to know how precisely to feel about such people.
    Shirin,
    Yeah, I hear you about the ‘advisor’ title, that is the way I see it and what motivated my original response to you. The thing that raises doubts with Feldman in particular is timing: he was part of a lame-duck machine under Garner, which was not so hell-bent on crafting the machinery (something we all came to fault them for later) even before Bremer was announced; Feldman was only there under a 3-month contract (an assistant prof at nyu has somewhat less flexibility on such things), and people in the advisor-cum-commandante slots don’t generally serve in unpaid status. His post-hoc comments on the matter aren’t in keeping with what people say about what goes on behind closed doors, either. None of that is vindication, but it is is enough to give one pause about his role, specifically.
    And as for your original point (or maybe it was my point and I am projecting it onto you unfairly), it still stands. This approach is a problem that is bigger than Feldman in Iraq, and from my perspective bigger than Iraq, too.
    I’d be interested in anything you could post/point to that mentions Feldman’s larger role as you describe it; I couldn’t find anything but obviously my search wasn’t comprehensive.

49. Just to add thing here, one of the members chose to write the Iraqi constitution (which I find odd to do it now while the country in a big miss) this before Hoshair Zibarry asking for US assistance in writing the Iraqi constitution this member said to the Arabic newspaper they will write the Iraqi constitution according to the draft copy of the TAL, this means to me as Noah put it, In fact this means to me they will copy Noah constitution.
    By the way in the interview Noah he try distances himself of writing Iraqi constitution, he went to described another details which is not more important that what his mission exactly there in Iraq.
    If you recall Noah return back to US after his trip in Iraq and blamed Bremer and the TAL for not let him doing his job, I think this some sort of cover what he done nothing ales.

50. Shirin,
    Israel has been an enemy state by choice of the Iraqis. Israel never had anything against Iraq, no territorial claims in spite of Salah’s ridiculous ramblings, and does not even share a border with Iraq.
    Iraq has sent forces to fight against Israel in every war. Why? I guess ethnic or religious affinity. The same one that prompts you to disqualify Feldman.
    I agree with you that we should not impose American sensitivities to Iraqis, therefore I feel relieved to be able to tell you, Shirin, you are full of shit.
    David

51. And David, that is a completely un-courteous thing to say. Take this as a warning, and if you want to continue as a participant here please clean up your act.

52. ‘Shirin, you are full of shit’
    Actually, it was quite amusing to me to watch someone loosing his temper when getting short of arguments in discussion. Shirin – you won (the argument).

53. “Retracting a mistake or apologizing for the insults that Shirin and you have written are generally useful for a dialogue. Assuming you are interested in dialogue with anybody that doesn’t share your conspiratorial views.”
    No comment…..

54. Helena,
    “Full of shit” is the American vernacular for “your arguments are generally devoid of value or veracity”.
    I did not mean to hurt her sensitivity.
    David

55. Andrew,
    Your observation is generally devoid of value or veracity :).
    David

56. You are, in the tiresome, typical American manner attempting to impose on Iraqis an American sensibility that simply does not apply there
    As you quite rightly pointed out, Shirin, not all sensibilities deserve to be catered to. I’d include among that number any sensibilities that are based on erroneous facts and/or a priori assumptions about the interests and motivations of ethnic groups.
    If that makes me a tiresome American, so be it. You have a right to argue that Arabs, or anyone else, are entitled to their sensibilities based on their interaction with others. Keep in mind, though, that when you do so, you’re also validating the stereotypes that other people have developed based on their interactions.
    Like Israeli stereotypes about Arabs. Think about it.

57. Jonathan,
    Nice argument, except that by making it a moral issue concerning ethnic stereotypes, you managed to deftly and completely sidestep my point. As a purely practical matter an American Jew with demonstratble ties to Israel was fairly close to the worst possible choice for any sensitive position – unless, of course, you have no problem confirming the very common and not completely unjustified feeling that serving Israeli interests was a strong driving force, and perhaps even THE driving force behind the invasion and takeover of Iraq.
    I would also submit that given that the overwhelming majority of American Jews are moderately strong to fanatical supporters of Israel, it is hardly stereotyping to expect any given American Jew to be an Israel supporter.

58. One further point, Jonathan:
    As we know a group of Europeans decided to create a state in a multiethnic,predominantly Arab area with but a miniscule Jewish population. They clearly and inequivocally defined this state as The Jewish State, and made it demographically so by means of massive immigration of Jews from all over the world. The symbols of this state are also Jewish. One of the overriding concerns for this state is the preservation of its “Jewish character”.
    By creating The Jewish State, populating it by means of massive immigration, and by emphasizing in various ways its “Jewish character”, Zionists have irrevocably politicized Jewishness. It is simply not possible to separate Jews and Jewishness from Zionism and Israel in any political context. It is simply not legitimate to reflexively cry “ethnic stereotyping”, or “racism” or “anti-Semitism” every time someone finds suspect the appointment of Jews to sensitive posts concerning the Middle East.
    You got your Jewish State. The politicization of Jewishness is one of the consequences you will just have to learn to live with, I am afraid.

59. Shirin, I agree that Friedman’s appointment was politically unwise, because of the sentiments you mention. If I were in charge of this whole sorry mess, I wouldn’t have appointed him. Where I disagree with you is your implication that the sentiments in question are valid and worthy of respect (as opposed to appeasement in the interests of political calm), and that it is illegitimate to question the basis of such sentiments. That is a moral issue.
    I also agree with you – to a point – with respect to the politicization of Judaism. Yes, we’re a nation now (or, more accurately, we’ve legalized our nationhood), and as such, we have to get down in the dirt and take our lumps with other nations. That includes being criticized for our behavior. On the other hand, I could say the same about Arabs and, to an extent, Muslims.
    The last century and a half has seen the emergence of Arab nationalism and the last half-century has seen the emergence of political Islam. Both are, according to some of their exponents (albeit not to others), expansionist ideologies, and both regard preservation of national character is important. The concept of an “Arab state” or “Islamic state” is enshrined in quite a few constitutions in the region, as well as domestic citizenship laws etc.
    Thus, I could argue as you do that Arab and Islamic identity have been irrevocably politicized. But if someone were to, in your words, “find suspect the appointment of [Arab Muslims] to sensitive posts concerning the Middle East,” I doubt you would accept that as a natural consequence of Arab nationalism or political Islam. In fact, I seem to remember you describing such sentiments as “Islamophobic” when held by other people.
    The bottom line is that I don’t accept your argument that the consequences of nationhood include forfeiture of judgment as an individual. If a Jew were appointed to a sensitive Middle East position, I’d say that his political views and associations are fair game, and that it’s legitimate to object to him because of his policy positions vis-a-vis Israel or connections to right-wing Israeli elements. Objecting to him on the ground that Jews are inherently compromised, however, isn’t legitimate unless you’re prepared to apply the same standard to all other ethnic or national groups with political interests. That’s racism however you dress it up, and although it may be politically expedient to accommodate such sentiments on some occasions, it’s absolutely legitimate to describe them as what they are.
    For the record, BTW, I don’t consider you a racist or an anti-Semite. In fact, I’m certain that you aren’t one. But I think that you’re letting your political views on the merits of Zionism take you some dangerous places.

60. Jonathan,
    1. For accuracy’s sake, my position is that Zionism (and whatever purists want to call post-Israeli-statehood support of Israel as The Jewish State) irrevocably turned Jewishness, the ethnicity/culture(s)/whatever, not Judaism, the religion, into a political designation.
    2. Your attempt to equate political Islam/Arab nationalism with Zionism is an apples and oranges argument.
    3. If a power with well demonstrated anti-Zionist sympathies occupied Israel and appointed a Muslim Palestinian with connections to the Haq Al `Awda organization to “advise” Israel on construction of its constitution, I would find the appointment deeply suspect. While I might internally cheer such an appointment based on my convictions regarding Palestinian rights, I would object to it on several levels.
    “I don’t accept your argument that the consequences of nationhood include forfeiture of judgment as an individual.
    I have not argued that they do. What I have argued is that it is reasonable and not at all a matter of stereotyping to assume that any given American Jew will have The Jewish State’s interests as a higher priority than the interests of any given Arab state. I also would argue that it is reasonable and not at all a matter of stereotyping to assume that any given Arab would have Palestinian rights as a higher priority than the interests of The State of Israel.
    Having said that, I must point out a few things about Iraq:
    1. Iraq has accepted several Jewish diplomats from the U.S. and other countries without any questions or problems at all.
    2. Jews have historically freely visited Iraq for business and all other imaginable purposes, and traveled throughout the country without any problems.
    3. Those of us who remember the days when there was a significant Jewish community in Iraq regret deeply and with huge sadness the loss of that community, and remember in a positive way our relationships with Iraqi Jews who were our neighbors, schoolmates, colleagues, and in some cases friends.

Comments are closed.