|
U.S. is completing plan to promote
a democratic Iraq
Washington -
President Bush's national security team is assembling final plans for
administering and democratizing Iraq after the expected ouster of
Saddam Hussein. Those plans call for a heavy American military
presence in the country for at least 18 months, military trials of
only the most senior Iraqi leaders and quick takeover of the country's
oil fields to pay for reconstruction.
The proposals, according to
administration officials who have been developing them for several
months, have been discussed informally with Mr. Bush in considerable
detail. They would amount to the most ambitious American effort to
administer a country since the occupations of Japan and Germany at the
end of World War II. With Mr. Bush's return here this afternoon, his
principal foreign policy advisers are expected to shape the final
details in White House meetings and then formally present them to the
president.
Many elements of the plans are highly
classified, and some are still being debated as Mr. Bush's team tries
to allay concerns that the United States would seek to be a colonial
power in Iraq. But the broad outlines show the enormous complexity of
the task in months ahead, and point to some of the difficulties that
would follow even a swift and successful removal of Mr. Hussein from
power, including these:
Though Mr. Bush came to office
expressing distaste for using the military for what he called nation
building, the Pentagon is preparing for at least a year and a half of
military control of Iraq, with forces that would keep the peace, hunt
down Mr. Hussein's top leaders and weapons of mass destruction and, in
the words of one of Mr. Bush's senior advisers, "keep the country
whole."
A civilian administrator — perhaps
designated by the United Nations — would run the country's economy,
rebuild its schools and political institutions, and administer aid
programs. Placing those powers in nonmilitary hands, administration
officials hope, will quell Arab concerns that a military commander
would wield the kind of unchallenged authority that Gen. Douglas
MacArthur exercised as supreme commander in Japan.
Only "key" senior officials
of the Hussein government "would need to be removed and called to
account," according to an administration document summarizing
plans for war trials. People in the Iraqi hierarchy who help bring
down the government may be offered leniency.
The administration plan says,
"Government elements closely identified with Saddam's regime,
such as the revolutionary courts or the special security organization,
will be eliminated, but much of the rest of the government will be
reformed and kept."
While publicly saying Iraqi oil would
remain what one senior official calls "the patrimony of the Iraqi
people," the administration is debating how to protect oil fields
during the conflict and how an occupied Iraq would be represented in
the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, if at all.
After long debate, especially between
the Pentagon and the State Department, the White House has rejected
for now the idea of creating a provisional government before any
invasion.
Officials involved in the planning
caution that no matter how detailed their plans, many crucial
decisions would have to be made on the ground in Iraq. So for now they
have focused on legal precedents — including an examination of the
legal basis for taking control of the country at all — and a study
of past successes and failures in nation building, reaching back to
the American administration of the Philippines after the
Spanish-American War.
The plans presented to Mr. Bush will
include several contingencies that depend heavily, officials say, on
how Mr. Hussein leaves power. "So much rides on the conflict
itself, if it becomes a conflict, and on how the conflict starts and
how the conflict ends," one of Mr. Bush's top advisers said.
Much also depends on whether the
arriving American troops would be welcomed or shot at, and the Central
Intelligence Agency has been drawing up scenarios that range from a
friendly occupation to a hostile one.
Yet under all of the possibilities,
the American military would remain the central player in running the
country for some time. The Pentagon has warned that it would take at
least a year to be certain that all of Mr. Hussein's weapons stores
were destroyed.
Notably, the administration's written
description of its goals include these two objectives: "preserve
Iraq as a unitary state, with its territorial integrity intact,"
and "prevent unhelpful outside interference, military or
nonmilitary," apparently a warning to neighboring countries.
Administration officials insist
American forces would not stay in Iraq a day longer than is necessary
to stabilize the country.
"I don't think we're talking
about months," one of Mr. Bush's top advisers said of the planned
occupation. "But I don't think we're talking a lot of years,
either."
The Command Military Joined With
Civilian
When administration officials first
began publicly discussing the idea of an American military
administration for Iraq, the reaction in the Arab world was swift: The
Arabs wanted no American Caesar in Iraq, no symbol of a colonial
governor. "The last thing we need," a senior official said,
in an allusion to General MacArthur, "is someone walking around
with a corncob pipe, telling Iraqis how to form a government."
As a result, the steering group on
Iraq policy is now discussing a hybrid command with an American
military commander in charge of security and some kind of civilian
administrator — of theoretically equal influence — to get the
schools running, the oil fields pumping and the economy jump-started.
It is not clear whether that administrator would be an American or if
the United Nations would take the lead in that part of the operation.
It is widely assumed that in the
first chaotic months, the military commander will have unquestioned
authority. "Remember, you will have decapitated the command and
control for the Iraqi military forces," a senior official said.
"Who is going to make sure that score-settling does not break
out, that there is not fights between the various ethnic communities?
It is going to have to be the U.S. military for some period of time,
and if there is a military command, there will certainly be a military
commander."
But the handover of more and more
responsibility from the military administration to an international
civilian administration — and several years down the road to an
Iraqi-run government — is still murky. Officials, referring to the
ruling Baath Party, say "de-Baathification" of the nation
will be at least as complex as de-Nazification was in Germany.
"We know one thing," said a
diplomat involved in the planning. "Things will have to come
together a lot faster than they have in Afghanistan."
The Oil Protecting It For the Iraqis
There is no more delicate question
for the administration than how to deal with Iraq's oil reserves —
the world's second largest, behind Saudi Arabia's — and how to raise
money from oil sales for rebuilding without prompting charges that
control of oil, not disarming Iraq, is Mr. Bush's true aim.
Administration officials have been
careful always to talk about Iraqi oil as the property of the Iraqi
people. But in the White House, the major concern is that Mr. Hussein
may plan to destroy the oil infrastructure in the first days of any
war, while trying to make it appear as if the destruction was the work
of American forces.
"What happens if he started
systematically destroying the fields?" a senior official said.
"It's a big source of concern, and we are trying to take account
of it as we plan how to use our military forces."
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell,
speaking on Dec. 29, hinted at such a military plan when he said,
"If coalition forces go into those oil fields, we would want to
protect those fields and make sure that they are used to benefit the
people of Iraq, and are not destroyed or damaged by a failing regime
on the way out the door."
The White House has already concluded
that the United Nations' oil-for-food program, under which Iraq is
permitted to sell a limited amount of oil to buy civilian goods, will
have to be amended quickly so oil revenues can be used more broadly in
the country. But it is unclear how the administration plans to finesse
the question of Iraq's role in OPEC and who would represent occupied
Iraq at the organization's meetings.
The administration is already
anticipating that neighboring Arab nations may accuse occupied Iraq of
pumping oil beyond OPEC quotas. One official said Washington
"fully expects" that the United States will be suspected of
undermining the oil organization, and it is working on strategies,
which he would not describe, to allay those fears.
The Leadership Planning Both Trials
And Incentives
Mr. Bush has been warning since
October that Iraqi generals who obeyed any orders to use chemical or
biological weapons against American troops would be punished, perhaps
as war criminals.
Now, as part of the effort to
undermine Mr. Hussein's government and get evidence that has so far
eluded United Nations inspectors, the White House is putting a
slightly different spin on that kind of talk.
Those who have helped build Mr.
Hussein's weapons stockpile, officials say, may win some redemption by
helping inspectors — and American forces.
That approach appears to be part of a
strategy to encourage a coup and persuade military leaders and
scientists to give up the country's chemical and biological stockpiles
and its nuclear research efforts. "The politics of Iraq are so
opaque that it's just hard to know what is or isn't rumbling under the
surface," one of Mr. Bush's most senior advisers said. As a
result, the president is looking to create "maximum
pressure" on the top leadership.
Already the C.I.A. and others have
drawn up lists of Mr. Hussein's top command and the heads of his
security forces who would probably be put on trial.
One State Department working group is
studying a kind of "truth and reconciliation" process,
modeled after the one in South Africa, which could publicly shame, but
not necessarily punish, human rights violators.
The Transition No to Installing
Provisional Rulers
Few issues have divided the
administration more bitterly than how to create a transitional Iraqi
government that could serve as a bridge between the American military
occupation and a permanent, democratic government. The issue reflects
the administration's ideological fault lines, and in recent months Mr.
Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, has stepped in, as
one senior aide said, "to make sure there was not a public food
fight on this one."
White House officials say that those
divisions have now been resolved, and that while planning is going
forward, the United States will not overtly install a provisional
government or designate its leaders.
The division was a familiar one.
Senior civilian officials in the Pentagon and some advisers to Vice
President Dick Cheney argued for the creation of a provisional
government even before Baghdad falls. It would be led, at least
initially, by Iraqi exiles. The proponents argue that such a
government in exile would speed creation of a permanent government if
Mr. Hussein is removed, allowing United States forces to withdraw
sooner. Among the reported advocates were Secretary of Defense Donald
H. Rumsfeld, who wants the military's role to be brief.
"The quicker you get a
transition from military victory to transitional government, the
better," a senior Pentagon official said. "We want to be
there as long as necessary, but as short as possible."
On the other side of the debate are
advocates of giving more power to Iraqis now living in Iraq. These
advocates, mainly in the State Department and C.I.A., say the Iraqi
exiles have no legitimacy among the Iraqi people. One proposal favored
by State Department officials calls for having an international
civilian agency, advised by Iraqis and protected by allied
peacekeeping forces, run the nation while Iraqis elect local
governments, create a new constitution and eventually select a
national legislature, somewhat along the postwar model of Afghanistan.
The White House has tried to finesse
those differences by saying it favors a government formed by
"free Iraqis" both inside and outside Iraq.
But inside the Pentagon there are
doubts. "The argument that you have to leave seats at the table
for people inside Iraq has one problem: there is no one inside,"
said a senior official who supports the Iraqi National Congress.
An official close to Mr. Bush
acknowledged that "there are not a lot of free Iraqis inside
Iraq." Pausing, he added, "But there will be." -- New
York Times
Brudirect.com
|