by Nathan Lucas
The biggest hurdle facing Iraq right now is their massive ethnic and religious stratification. Establishing a mostly authoritarian system would be a very poor idea, as whichever ruler(s) are in place are likely to fall into one of Iraq's widely varying religious groups (and thus political party), whose decisions would likely result in chaos, revolt, and the like. Logically, given that Iraq's infrastructure is in a very bad way, and as such there is insufficient military strength to enforce such a harsh rule, only a generally democratic system has even the potential to work. And since this is the only option, attaining legitimacy by any means is absolutely essential. The easiest method for this would have to involve some combination of a complex and inefficient bureaucracy, or extremely limited terms of office for elected officials. This would hinder progress, but act as a sort of political kidney to help filter the life blood of the government such that all of the organs in this metaphorical body can give and receive sufficiently. As for achieving government control, time is really the only thing that can help. With the passage of time, any new and wisely developed government can slowly expand its genuinely sovereign territory, as far as the reaches of its state lines.
Capitalism and democracy seem to suit one another quite well. For this reason, Iraq's new economy must be of the former. In all actuality, a communist philosophy is beyond the grasp of human capability. In several thousand years, if the human race still exists, communism may be feasible. However, understanding our inherent weaknesses such as tendencies towards sloth and idleness, a system involving equal proportions of effort to reward is much more reasonable. In addition, capitalist systems tend to work simply better in the presence of increased natural resources. Iraq's exports are crude oil products, which implies a great deal about their natural geographic advantage. Combined with the 60 million cubic meters of silt delivered annually via the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to the delta, Iraq represents a very healthy outlook for growth. Such a healthy outlook is one that can likely survive with little or no government intervention. I propose that we give the land to the people, and let the people build their future. The more the government meddles, the less pure the capitalist system becomes, and the more hindered it will be. The one exception to this rule is an obvious one, though. Taxation must be based on a flat percentage, which is determined through the cooperation of the legislative and executive branches. This tax is based solely on a person's income. The percentage can vary year to year. There shall be as few tax breaks as possible, and most of those that exist are to serve as incentives for citizens to do positive things for society, beyond their individual need.
A constitution is an absolute must for any governing body. Without a supreme law of the land, there is no final word in resolving disputes. Undeniably, it must have some kind of hard-copy form. Writing it on parchment with black ink, and signing it publicly is a great way to do this. Given such massive importance, great care must be taken when such a document is to be written. Regardless of whether they are shared or separated, there are always three main functions of a government. Judging purely from the relative success that the United States has enjoyed using a system of shared power but separate functions, it is sensible to apply such a design to this newly reforming nation. Granted, much of the specifics of this are open to reformation, but the key here is to create a government that cannot collapse upon itself. Like the game of paper, rock, scissors, each branch of the government must support a second, and be supported by a third, Only a handful of specifics are really worth elaborating on, such as is the election processes and the terms of office, due to the rather volatile demographics in this area. For one thing, terms of office must be shorter than our own, to combat the threat of oppression and revolt. This way, people are given easier access to repairing problems. Any and all governing bodies must be comprised of a representative sample of the different ethnic groups. Strange as this sounds, affirmative action in the government seems like a good idea here. Thus, whether or not the system turns out to be Presidential or a Parliamentary is largely irrelevant. Ideologically speaking, they can both serve the same purpose equally well. Another issue worth mentioning is the judicial system. Where fusion of power may exist between the legislative and executive branches, the judicial branch must be kept separate altogether. No government influence may exist here. There are no judges, per se, instead there will be only juries comprised of a representative sample of the defendant's peers. They will have the final say in interpreting the law. This is one area of government where absolute abstraction, and any existing human compassion and honesty, are the only allowable factors.
Once again, considering the large ethnic and cultural gaps that need to be unified under one rule, bureaucracies must be slow and inefficient. As stated before, there is no reason why the process should be allowed to be sloppy. Time efficiency is expendable, but the quality-of-service efficiency is not. In other words, it's better to have the right pizza delivered late, than the wrong one on time. This is really just a matter of personal opinion, however.
Great tension and ethnic violence are bound to occur continually far into the future. However, as long as senseless murder and violence are curbed by a reasonably stable police and military force, Iraq should still function. A sense of national identity is not probable to appear in the immediate future, simply because of the current situation. This is especially true since the fall of Saddam Hussein only occurred two years ago. An oppressive dictatorship of any kind will suppress not only national identities, but individual identities as well. There is damage done that will take much time to heal. With a free, uncensored press, and a media system that can report whatever it pleases, this sense of national identity should gradually return, despite foreseeable roughness in the process.
Recognizing the blatantly obvious parallels to America's own system in this proposal will only encourage correct predictions regarding the content of this paragraph. Interest groups, if the electorate so happen to be in favor of allowing such things, can and must be autonomous creations of civil society. In a system that has been described as it has thus far, it would certainly be completely senseless for the government to be granted the authority to control these interest groups to its whim, especially since the government is supposed to be comprised of citizens, whose plights are the same as those of any ordinary person. Should this phenomenon ever begin to surface, it should serve as a bright red flag to warn that Constitutional procedures are not being followed.
As for political parties, the number that appear should reflect the current number of significantly different ideologies. These, in turn, are often the result of religious discrepancies among people, which, in turn, coincide with the cultural gaps that do and may exist in the future. All in good time, however, these should gradually blur together and become fewer in number. As long as there is not some large, gaping, non-obvious flaw in the system this should hold true. In the event of an occurrence of a scenario where there are more political parties than necessary, coalition governments will form, and the end result will be similar. No matter what ultimately pans out, there must not be any hindrance by the government on what happens, as this would contradict the base philosophy that the whole thing is founded upon.
Political participation on the part of the citizens will be as close to compulsory as possible, without actually being such. It is a vital part of any democratic system, but since democracies are meant to avoid oppression, a certain compromise must be struck. The minimum voting age will be 15, because this is the age where literacy is determined in Iraq. Although only literate citizens will be allowed to vote, those who are illiterate shall be provided with government-funded literacy classes, free to all who attend. Tax breaks will be given to those who vote, as well. Those who do not vote are not subject to penalty. As for the candidates, anyone over 15 can run. The maximum term of office for any elected official is 3 years, with most positions yielding much lower terms. However, there are no limits on re-election. If the people really favor someone, they should keep him in office, but he is always required to win the election every time.
Compiling on this into a single, easily-digestible lump yields the following. Irathaq, as it will now be called, will be full of surprises. The first of which is the strange coincidental parallel between Mesopotamia being a cradle of human civilization, not once, but twice now. In addition, Irathaq (which is a partial anagram of Iraq and Nathan, by the way), no matter how it is constructed, will have a hard time getting started. But with patience, perseverance, and a little luck, this violence-prone train wreck of a country may very well become a "promised land" after all. Most likely, this violence will likely be caused by the same things that's caused it all along: people disagreeing about things. They look different, so they kill each other. They worship a different version of the same god, so they kill each other. Someone stole somebody's goat, so they kill each other. It's always something frivolous. Hopefully these lines of division will work themselves out with the assistance of my new form of government. Hopefully human beings are better than all this. A man builds a machine, and then he tests it; if it works, it works. If not, he rebuilds it.
Dude, there is always plenty of stuff to do at the TEEN ZONE!
Contact the Teen Zone at 566-2201 or email at teenzone@infoway.org.