Font size: 
The insurgents are trying every means to create an atmosphere of terror, attacking anywhere at any time. The Green Zone, government offices, military and police recruiting and training centers have all been targeted. Markets, shopping malls, guard posts, hospitals and even schools and churches have been the objects of terrorist attacks. Despite increasingly heavy security measures, seldom a day passes without an attack.
Iraq is now nothing more than a token sovereign state. Iraq has a new government; the former dictator Saddam Hussein has been hung; investment has come to rebuild the country's infrastructure; yet there is still no hope of peace.
The Iraqi people are threatened, their territory is occupied, their government does not run normally and their forces are accomplishing next to nothing. What's more, fighting between different ethnic groups and religious sects has brought new challenges to the stability of both Iraq and the whole Middle East.
A U.S. withdrawal seems already to be on the agenda. Though U.S. President George W. Bush remarked recently that Iraq was not a second Vietnam, Americans may not be willing to bear increasing casualties among their soldiers. A growing number of Republicans are joining the Democrats in pressing for the United States to "give up" Iraq, and international voices are also calling for a complete pull-out of foreign troops.
Yet Iraq is not ready. Imagine what will happen if the foreign troops leave, and Iraq has to function completely on its own. Will the terrorism stop? Will the government run normally? Will the Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds come together for reconciliation? Will Iraq evolve as a model of democracy?
The answer to all these questions is an unequivocal "No." The Middle East has throughout history been riddled with conflicts. If the foreigners leave and the lid comes off Pandora's Box, evils will emerge one after another.
Regional power competitions will emerge. Iran, Israel and Egypt will compete for resources and for the means to ensure their own security. Separatists will grab the opportunity to try and create their own states; Kurds, Shiites and Sunnis will seek to avenge what they see as wrongs against them. Terrorism will not disappear in the foreseeable future. On the contrary, the forces of al-Qaida, the Taliban and the Baathists will all seek to restore their power. Under these circumstances Iraq will more closely resemble a powder keg than the "cradle of civilization."
For the sake of better governance, political caution is needed, even though it may require adjusting to a dimmer view of the future. Democracy is a good thing, but now is not the time to talk about it in Iraq. The need for stability and legitimate governance is much more compelling. Iraq, in its current state of turmoil, stands little chance as a testing ground for democracy.
Hence, an authoritarian regime may be necessary in the present Iraq. This does not mean a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein, or even an overthrow of the present Iraqi government. An authoritarian regime is different from a dictatorship. Authoritarian governance stresses a concentration of power and a system of laws and principles, while a dictatorship concentrates power in the hands of one individual and bows to personal whim, regardless of laws and principles.
Authoritarian governance is not new in the world. Governments in some Asian and African states, such as Singapore and Egypt, have done well under this style of governance. Some states in Latin America are also in practice authoritarian regimes.
In a failed state like Iraq, where state institutions do not function normally, authoritarian governance may be more effective. With the withdrawal of foreign forces the country is likely to be further destabilized, facing internal rivalries, regional hegemonism and international terrorism. To deal with all these factors, a concentration of power may be more effective than a democratic government.
Under a strong centralized leadership, the functions of government can be normalized. Only after that does it make sense to talk about setting up a democracy. As an interim measure, an authoritarian government may be Iraq's best option.
--
(Zhang Quanyi is an associate professor at the Zhejiang Wanli University in Ningbo, China, and a PhD candidate at Shanghai International Studies University, studying policy making and collective identity. He is currently a research fellow at the School of International Studies at Yonsei University in Seoul, Korea, under a grant by the Korea Foundation. He can be contacted at qyzhangupi@yahoo.com. ©Copyright Zhang Quanyi.)
