December 21, 2005

OMAR has more on the Iraqi elections.

UPDATE: Still more from Omar here, and worries from Publius. I’m not sure what to make of events so far, but Kaus’s argument that more, closer-together elections would be better is looking pretty good.

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Michael McFatter thinks Publius’s concerns are premature:

But this is precisely the point at which democrats don’t exchange blows and instead follow the law. His characterization of “real liberal democracy” being composed of groups who are genuinely “working for the better of the whole country” is I think a little Pollyannish. What distinguishes real liberal democracies from psuedo-democracies is that when a crisis has arisen, like now, leaders seek a resolution which involves compromise on both sides within the rule of law. We have yet to see what Iraqis will do, but this was always going to be the riskiest part of the plan. Will they truly reject quasi-fascist tribalism for peace and prosperity or will the region persist in the road to self-destruction. It’s always been in their hands. Our invasion and assistance has only made the choice explicit and more immediate.

Democratization is a process, not an event. We’ll soon see just how far along in the process we’ve progressed.

MORE: Tom Friedman and Greg Djerejian share guarded optimism, and a cab.

Comments are closed.