Special Council

Facts matter: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter. Support our nonprofit reporting. Subscribe to our print magazine.




This past week, while anti-American forces continued to make life difficult for the U.S. in Iraq, France’s Jacques Chirac called again for a rapid switch to Iraqi self-governance, and Ahmed Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi Governing Council (I.G.C.), swung by the United Nations to make the case for more Iraqi control of their country. President Bush told the U.N. that he’s in no rush to hand over power to the Iraqis. But even if he was, is the I.G.C. ready to take on more authority in the midst of Iraq’s chaos? And would Iraqis accept it?

The American-appointed 25-person council is just over two months old, and has been at the center of many critiques of Bush’s elusive post-war plan in Iraq. Criticisms range from, “it’s a useless, undemocratic, puppet organization,” to “it’s Iraq’s only hope but its mandate is too limited.” The Middle East Report Online has an extensive report on what the I.G.C. can and can’t do.

E.A. Khammas, the co-director of the Baghdad Occupation Watch Center and author Rahul Mahajan, of the newly formed website Occupation Watch, argue that the core problem with the governing council lies in its undemocratic origins. Their group has carried out a number of interviews with Iraq’s leading intellectuals and politicians, and published their findings in an op-ed for Middle East Online. Those interviewed feel that the Iraqi Governing Council has been handed an impossible task by the Americans. Professor Wisal al-Azzawi, dean of the College of Political Sciences of Nehrein University, wonders why the Americans didn’t consult Iraq’s leading professionals.

“Why didn’t they ask our opinion? What role was there for scientists, technocrats, intellectuals businessmen, unions? Because of the way it was secretly appointed, the Council appears very much an American product imposed on the Iraqi people…The democratic process does not happen in a day or two, and should not be connected to a handful of people who collaborated with the occupation.”

This kind of distrust is pretty typical in Khammas and Mahajan’s piece, and the authors ultimately recommend that the American authorities spend more time consulting with people like the professor.

It didn’t help the I.G.C.’s image with Arabs that the U.S. occupation authorities recently decided to bar Arab satellite TV stations Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya from riling the Arab world by spreading “poison” in their coverage of I.G.C. activities over the next two weeks.

It seems that the I.G.C. has few fans these days, particularly in the Middle East. However, Amir Taheri, of Gulf News thinks that those who find the council problematic are just whining about the loss of their beloved Saddam.

Clearly, this is a debate that will run and run. Less clear is whether the council will ever be more than symbolic, or whether it will ever be fully accepted by Iraqis.

THE TRUTH...

is the first thing despots go after. An unwavering commitment to it is probably what draws you to Mother Jones' journalism. And as we're seeing in the US and the world around, authoritarians seek to poison the discourse and the way we relate to each other because they can't stand people coming together around a shared sense of the truth—it's a huge threat to them.

Which is also a pretty great way to describe Mother Jones' mission: People coming together around the truth to hold power accountable.

And right now, we need to raise about $400,000 from our online readers over the next two months to hit our annual goal and make good on that mission. Read more about the information war we find ourselves in and how people-powered, independent reporting can and must rise to the challenge—and please support our team's truth-telling journalism with a donation if you can right now.

payment methods

THE TRUTH...

is the first thing despots go after. An unwavering commitment to it is probably what draws you to Mother Jones' journalism. And as we're seeing in the US and the world around, authoritarians seek to poison the discourse and the way we relate to each other because they can't stand people coming together around a shared sense of the truth—it's a huge threat to them.

Which is also a pretty great way to describe Mother Jones' mission: People coming together around the truth to hold power accountable.

And right now, we need to raise about $400,000 from our online readers over the next two months to hit our annual goal and make good on that mission. Read more about the information war we find ourselves in and how people-powered, independent reporting can and must rise to the challenge—and please support our team's truth-telling journalism with a donation if you can right now.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate