Hasty Exit Leaves Unfullfilled Promises

As reports of soldiers and civilians dying in Iraq-under-reconstruction continue, the U.S. government is right to expedite the clean-up process, to build new what we have torn-down and accordingly withdraw our interfering presence.
Regardless of whether the United States was justified to engage the former Iraqi regime; we must now focus our attention and concentrate our efforts on fostering a stable, peaceful and self-reliant nation from the foundation we have shaken and now are entrusted with the responsibility to repair.
We must fulfill our promises and exit/leave Iraq a better place than when we disturbed it.
The people of Iraq are deserving of what America now owes them. That is why the recent announcement of the United States’ planned withdrawal from Iraq by June without first drawing up a constitution is troubling news.
If the new plan involves leaving Iraq under the sovereignty of an appointed/commissioned interim government, we are making the mistake of stepping back away from the responsibility of seeing the entire process through, that if anything goes wrong, we will have separated ourselves from the liability.
What a distorted lesson to have learned from our mistake in Iran during the 80s, when American-installed Shah Reza Pahlavi became a dictator who was overthrown by the fundamentalist revolt under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeni who preached anti-American sentiment to his followers.
We are ready to make the same mistake again.
By June 2004, when the responsibility of fulfilling our commitments has been passed on to somebody else, maybe President George W. Bush can then focus on his reelection campaign. He can try to distance himself from the continuing discord in Iraq in hopes of preserving his seat in office.
As projected reconstruction timetables are extending farther into more distant futures, President Bush may be wishing to escape the consequent chaos that has been playing out each day since the declared end of major combat operations.
To attempt to establish a government in Iraq without, first, drafting a constitution outlining the framework of the new government is a backward methodology.
How can a government function or carryout its role properly without a game plan?
The premise of a swift exit from Iraq is a righteous and idealistic goal, that as an idea alone is logical and worth at least a pat on the back.
However, the new proposal set in motion to reach this goal is not only peculiar in its sequence, but is also an unjustified reversal from the United States’ initial decision to establish a new constitution prior to handing sovereignty of Iraq to a newly and democratically elected Iraqi government.
It would be in the good interests of both the people in Iraq and actually the better interests of the potential success of President Bush’s re-election campaign to return to the former wiser approach to achieving a new independent Iraq of modeling the new government on an established constitution.
The short-term compromise of the U.S. presence in Iraq being extended to execute the process of rebuilding Iraq’s government properly far outweighs the potential years of turmoil, instability and continued U.S. involvement resulting from the new Iraqi government established on a fragile and poorly constructed foundation.

Send comments to newu@uci.edu. Include name, year and major.