Rumsfeld and Powell Rule Out Religious Gov't for Iraq

[Timber Loftis]

From today's NY Times:

Rumsfeld Rules Out Religious Iraqi Government
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 1:01 p.m. ET

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld is ruling out an Iran-style religious government in Iraq as well as any attempt by Syria and others in the region to influence Iraq's future.

``If you're suggesting, how would we feel about an Iranian-type government with a few clerics running everything in the country, the answer is: That isn't going to happen,'' Rumsfeld said.

On the other hand, Secretary of State Colin Powell said religious Muslims should not be precluded from governing Iraq.

``There are Islamic countries that are having elections -- Pakistan, Turkey. It's happening,'' Powell said in an interview Thursday with al-Arabiya, a television station based in Dubai.

``Why cannot an Islamic form of government that has as its basis the faith of Islam not also be democratic?'' he asked.

``There are some people who say, well, because you're practicing Islam you can't allow people to choose how they will be governed politically. I don't think Islam presents that,'' he said.

``It's up to the Iraqi people,'' Powell said in a separate interview with Free Iraq TV/Radio. ``It's not up to the United States.''

Speaking to the Iraqi people directly for the first time, Powell said ``the coalition forces that are there are there to help them'' recover from the Baath party leadership.

At the same time, Powell said the Bush administration had expressed concern to Iran that it cease trying to have ``undue influence'' with Shiites in southern Iraq. ``We know there's some movement in from Iran,'' he said.

A senior administration official said President Bush wants a government in Iraq that is democratic, multiethnic, maintains Iraq's territorial integrity, has no weapons of mass destruction and is at peace with its neighbors.

Shiites in Iraq are the majority Islamic sect, and they disagree on whether to embrace a secular government or an Iran-style theocracy. Some U.S. officials worry that the Islamic government in Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, may seek to influence Iraq's postwar reshaping.

Interviewed in his Pentagon conference room, Rumsfeld said the Iraqi people, after decades of political repression, need time to adjust to a new reality and to determine for themselves how to organize a new government and elections.

The president made a similar point Thursday in a speech to workers at a tank factory in Ohio.

``One thing is certain: We will not impose a government on Iraq,'' Bush said. ``We will help that nation build a government of, by and for the Iraqi people.''

Due to travel soon to Iraq, Rumsfeld also said that U.S. and British forces were searching for many more former members of the Saddam Hussein government than the 55 on a ``most wanted'' list.

``In fact we have a list of some 200,'' he said. ``That original list was purposely kept low at the outset because we wanted to separate the worst people from the regime, hoping that others would come forward.''

Rumsfeld said more of the top 55 have been captured in the past day or so than have been announced. He gave no details and said that once the identities were verified they would be made public.

U.S. forces in Iraq have taken custody of Tariq Aziz, the former deputy prime minister and the most visible Iraqi leader other than Saddam.

On the U.S. list of the 55 most-wanted members of the former government, Aziz was No. 43, the eight of spades in the military's card deck of top Iraqi leaders.

His prominence in the regime could make Aziz a source for the best information yet on the fate of the former Iraqi leader and his two sons, as well as on the location of any hidden weapons of mass destruction.

Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Thursday night the arrest of another top Iraq official, in Syria, would be announced shortly.

Graham, at a session of the Council on Foreign Relations, declined to identify the Iraqi, saying only that he had held one of the most sensitive positions in the Iraqi government and was arrested in the past 24 hours.

The senator accused the Bush administration of ``failed diplomacy'' on Iraq and said U.S. relationships and alliances should be rebuilt. He also called for including the United Nations in rebuilding Iraq.
__________________________________________________ ________

President Bush wants a government in Iraq that is democratic, multiethnic, maintains Iraq's territorial integrity, has no weapons of mass destruction and is at peace with its neighbors.

Sounds reasonable to me. Let's be real, by imposing a VOTE we are imposing a form of government. And, it will be unlikely the Iraqi's can vote to do away with voting. But, religious governments are a problem and, from what we're seeing, lead to extremism. Governments need be secular. Governments can be run by elected clerics or priests, but making rules like only Muslims may be elected or allowing a handful of clerics absolute power in a country is simply wrong for the world, IMO.

I am not sure it is up to the Secretary of Defense to make those descisions, however, if you look at the wonderful living conditions and stability of those religion based governments...Im thinkin, you might wan't to have seperation of church and state in Iraq...if ya know what I mean.

Edit: see headliens of woman who get 75 lashes of the whip for kissing a fellow actor on the cheek....Im thinkin it was his face she kissed here...

[ 04-25-2003, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

[Chewbacca]

How arrogant it seems to rule out what kind of goverment the Iraqi's choose for themselves.

We have no right to limit what kind of goverment the Iraqi choose for themselves.

We may as well tell the Vatican the Pope can't rule anymore.

[Animal]

It does seem a little one sided. I thought the Iraqi people were to be given freedom? The freedom to choose. By limiting their choices you take away their freedom. I don't understand how US officials can possibly think this is in the best interests of the Iraqi's. Maybe the best interests of the US, but certainly not for Iraq.

[Azred]

I agree that we should not limit the type of government the Iraqi people choose. No, it would not be in our best interest for the government of Iraq to be a theocracy, but the choice must be theirs and theirs alone.

Paul Berman asserts in his new book Terror and Liberalism that Islamists (those who act as terrorists) are acting out against the Separation of Church and State, the act of ruling a country without the consent of God. If his assertion is true, then the next government of Iraq--the one that comes into power after the one we help establish is gone within the next decade--will be a Fundamentalist theocracy.

[khazadman]

I'll be damned if we fought a war to remove a dictator just to have another rise in it's place. Most of the Iraqis do NOT want an Islamic state. The push for an Islamic state is being lead by Iran.

[Chewbacca]

why is an Islamic state so wrong. From what I understand of the social laws of Islam, a Muslim state need not be a dictatorship, nor made up of 100% muslims only. Perhaps there is more to Islam than fanatics and dictators?

http://islampeace.org/humanrights.html

The Political Framework Of Islam The political system of Islam is based on the three principles of towhid(Oneness of Allah), risala (Prophethood) and Khilifa(Caliphate). Towhidmeans that one Allah alone is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it - organic or inorganic. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone. No aspect of life in all its multifarious forms ¾ our own organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over physical objects or the objects themselves ¾ has been created or a acquired by us in our own right. They are the bountiful provisions of Allah and have been bestowed on us by Him alone. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our worldly authority; nor does anyone else have the right to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah. This principle of the Oneness of Allah makes meaningless the concept of the legal and political sovereignty of human beings. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments constitute the law of Islam. Risala is the medium through which we receive the law of Allah. We have received two things from this source: the Qur’an, the book in which Allah has expounded His law, and the authoritative interpretation and exemplification of that Book by the Prophet Muhammad (blessings of Allah and peace be upon him), through word and deed, in his capacity as the representative of Allah. The Qur’an laid down the broad principles on which human life should be based and the Prophet of Allah, in accordance with these principles, established a model system of Islamic life. The combination of these two elements is called the shari’a (law). Khilifa means "representation". Man, according to Islam, is the representative of Allah on earth, His vice-gerent; that is to say, by virtue of the powers delegated to him by Allah, and within the limits prescribed, he is required to exercise Divine authority. To illustrate what this means, let us take the case of an estate of yours which someone else has been appointed to administer on your behalf. Four conditions invariably obtain: First, the real ownership of the estate remains vested in you and not in the administrator; secondly, he administers your property directly in accordance with your instructions; thirdly, he exercises his authority within the limits prescribed by you; and fourthly, in the administration of the trust he executes your will and fulfils your intentions and not his own. Any representative who does not fulfil these four conditions will be abusing his authority and breaking the covenant which was implied in the concept of "representation". This is exactly what Islam means when it affirms that man is the representative (khalifa) of Allah on earth. Hence, these four conditions are also involved in the concept of Khalifa. The state that is established in accordance with this political theory will in fact be a caliphate under the sovereignty of Allah. Democracy In Islam The above explanation of the term Khilafa also makes it clear that no individual or dynasty or class can be Khalifa: the authority of Khilafa is bestowed on the whole of any community which is ready to fulfil the conditions of representation after subscribing to the principles of towhid and Risala. Such a society carries the responsibility of the Khilafa as a whole and each one of its individuals shares in it. This is the point where democracy begins in Islam. Every individual in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of Allah and in this respect all individuals are equal. No-one may deprive anyone else of his rights and powers. The agency for running the affairs of the state will be formed by agreement with these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of the individuals delegated to it. Their opinion will be decisive in the formation of the government, which will be run with their advice and in accordance with their wishes. Whoever gains their confidence will undertake the duties and obligations of the caliphate on their behalf; and when he loses this confidence he will have to step down. In this respect the political system of Islam is as perfect a dorm of democracy as there can be. What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy, therefor, is that the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty, while the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafa. In Western democracy, the people are sovereign; in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (shari’a) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other the government and the people have to fulfil the will of Allah.

[Luvian]

The coalition said they wanted to bring Democracy to the Middle East, not another religious government. There is a big difference between a democracy and a theocracy. In a democracy, the leader get elected by the people, in a theocracy, the country is ruled by the church, the people has no say in it.

[Donut]

The Iraqis are now free to choose what ever form of Government they want, as long as .........................!

Originally posted by Chewbacca: How arrogant it seems to rule out what kind of goverment the Iraqi's choose for themselves. We have no right to limit what kind of goverment the Iraqi choose for themselves. We may as well tell the Vatican the Pope can't rule anymore.

Technically being the winner in armed conflict sort of gives you the right to do what ever the hell you want [img]smile.gif[/img] I cite presetn day Germany and Japan as success stories of US initiated governments. [img]smile.gif[/img] You call it arrogant....is a parent arrogant when he teaches his child about something new?

Edit: It would be irresponsible to liberate people who have been subjugated for generations and let them wander with no direction. The US is there to teach and explain how democracy works....hopefully a Representative Republic will be adopted.

[ 04-26-2003, 11:31 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]