|
Sir,
Whilst much of current planning in Iraq seems to
place great store on the result of the elections
scheduled for the end of January, one can easily
envisage the elections having to be postponed, or
their results, should they go ahead on time, being
anything but helpful.
It is hard to imagine what assurances the Shia
(majority) community can give to the Sunnis to
ensure their active participation in the democratic
process. Should the Sunnis boycott the elections it
will be impossible to claim the results as
meaningful.
Bearing in mind that Iraq has no experience of being
governed as a single, democratic country, and that
most Iraqis’ loyalties are to their tribal, ethnic
and religious leaders, would it not be better to
prepare now for alternatives should the result of
the elections prove unhelpful?
The most obvious solution is a federation. With
autonomy granted to the Kurds, Sunnis and Shias
within a federal structure, many of the current
rivalries and insecurities would be lessened. A
federal Iraq is less likely to be a danger to its
neighbours and, with a constitution guaranteeing
minority rights backed by the United Nations, there
would be a reasonable chance of an end to the
current violence. This in turn would hasten the date
for the withdrawal of coalition forces, to
everyone’s advantage.
Obviously, there would be many difficulties to
overcome on the ground, such as ownership of the oil
fields. (Although paying 80 per cent of oil
royalties to an independent Iraq development board,
as practised in pre-1958 days, could be a solution.)
A federation would, surely, be a great improvement
on the all-too-likely result of pursuing current
policies.
I remain, Sir,
Yours faithfully,
DAVID LLEWELLYN,
2 Claremont Court,
Grundys Lane, Malvern Wells,
Worcestershire WR14 4HS.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk
Top |
® 