Iraqis On A Familiar Path to Democracy

When Washington made his legendary Christmas night crossing of the Delaware, his troops were ill-prepared for combat and uncertain regarding the future of their cause. They were fighting a war that would require assistance from France, one of the world’s great powers. They were fighting for a nation which had been denied representative government and had only recently shed the rule of an unbalanced tyrant. Moreover, it was less a nation than a confederation of separate states often split by social, geographical and religious differences – free and slave, north and south, Anglicans, Quakers, Deist and more.

The Delaware crossing took place nearly six months after the signing of the Declaration of Independence and a full year before the miserable winter at Valley Forge. In fact, it would be nearly five more years before England would surrender and the independence of the former colonies would be guaranteed.

Imagine the pundits of the day had there been a full-blown 24-hour news cycle that reported on every challenge and setback. They would have argued over the justification for the war – was it to end taxation without representation, a fight for independence from England or to establish democracy? Or were those simply smokescreens to cover up a more sinister cause – to protect the moneyed interests who wanted England out of their hair for financial reasons?

They would have claimed that trying to defeat England was futile. That there was no end in sight, and that the war would only serve to split the colonies into fragmented, warring factions which would bring nothing but conflict and bloodshed between them for years to come.

And they would have argued that this concept called democracy was unworkable in a land where few were educated, many couldn’t read and where tyranny had ruled.

It would have sounded a lot like what’s been said about Iraq for the past two years.

Granted, there are differences. Among them that we, rather than the Iraqi’s, started the fight and the enemy is a nameless band of insurgents rather than a sovereign state. But if there was a take-home lesson from last week’s vote, it was that the Iraqi people are hungry for democracy. So much so that 8 million were willing to risk life and limb in order to exercise their right to vote.

There have been naysayers from the start, arguing that democracy is incompatible with the culture of the Middle East. But events in the past six months should put that notion to rest. We’ve had meaningful elections among Afghanis, Palestinians and Iraqis. Iran will elect a new president in a few months, and though conservative mullahs hope to suppress the reformist movement that began with the 2000 elections, an undercurrent of pro-Western sentiment continues to grow among the Iranian people.

I’m not sure why some are so ready to dismiss the universal appeal of democracy. Yes, it faces challenges in the Middle East, not the least of which is that there are enemies who are deathly afraid of its establishment in the region. But the mere depth of their fear is a testament to democracy’s power and appeal.

Each person that votes is one more devotee to the elegant concept of self-governance. Last week, 8 million more joined the list of converts. More of that and democracy will become the rule rather than the exception in a place where it was once thought impossible.