Originally Posted by James_Van_Thach
If the certain communities support a Constitutional Monarchy then they are going to have to organize themselves and put in a forum for the people of the whole nation can render a vote on the status of their nation. What I have been told from some Iraqis is that they would favor a Constitutional Monarchy like Jordan and Britain but never an Absolute Monarch.
The people may just choose to have the King form the same responsibilities as the Emperor of Japan as a figurehead to unite the people, historical heritage and a person that is a diplomat and Ambassador of the Iraqi people.
There are many options for the people of Iraq but it is going to take time because the security situation is not at a level where a person like Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein or another candidate that has a platform can be killed by a person or organization that wants to render havoc on the society of Iraq.
The Iraqi Security Forces are going to have to continue to improve and ensure the Iraqi people that it can provide protection of their rights, which will build trust in the communities. This will allow the people of the nation to conduct their daily lives and pursue the goals that they see fit to express for the future of their nation.
James Van Thach
It took the Japanese about 5 years of hideous warfare and absolute defeat. Additionally, they are an extremely homogeneous people who have an ingrained sense of shared cultural responsibility.
Another useful model might be the English, in which through a long sequence changes, some quite bloody, evolved from absolute despotic monarchy to figurehead monarchy.
But I agree with you this much, James, if any country serves as a model for a successful monarchy in a pluralistic society it is Jordan. Importantly, the current and previous kings both officially and personally set a goal of parliamentary democracy for the kingdom. It is slowly evolving in that direction and the people seem to be quite patient with the process and tolerant of the occasional lapses of the kings while they follow that path. It would take a major change in Iraq for the people to invest that level of trust in any individual. I guess we must take your word for it that this king you mention is the one. I hope you're right.
In a sense, I believe that some folks over-state the Iranian problem. True, they share a religious denomination with the majority population. However, the Iraqi Shiites are ethnic Arabs for the most part, not Persians. So if the "strongman" can appeal to ethnicity and nationality over religion he might pull it off.
But he cannot totally appeal strictly to ethnicity because the Kurds and other minorities would then be threatened.
In my opinion, your role is to give Iraq a "breathing space" so that they can build confidence in their civil government. The question us taxpayers are struggling with his how much "breathing space" we can afford to provide for Iraq.
Just from watching the ebb and flow on this website I can't believe that taxpayers have the patience for more than another few months without some extraordinary improvement in the perception of events in Iraq. If there are improvements, even weak ones, that politicians can use for cover, then the forces may stay on the ground and in force for another year. But patience is wearing thin and the country is in the mood to capitulate, declare victory, and bring everybody home.