Where I Stand — Mike O’Callaghan: Dreams and nightmares

Thursday, March 20, 2003 | 8:58 a.m.

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH has good intentions to rebuild Iraq after the war. He has concluded that Saddam Hussein must be removed and his deadly weapons destroyed. He is right on target, because the past 12 years has only created a bigger monster than Saddam was when we let him off the hook after driving his army from Kuwait. Something other than diplomatic haggling has to be done. No longer do we have the luxury of playing games or doing nothing.

Our plate is rapidly being filled with North Korea's nuclear threat and the terrorists supported, armed and paid for as the cats' paws of Syria and Iran. There can be good arguments in support of the belief that Iran and North Korea are bigger threats than Iraq. I'm one of the people who has that belief, but right now Iraq is our sore, which has been allowed to fester for far too long.

What does concern me are the Bush plans to turn the country of Iraq into a democracy. This just won't work for any reasonable period of time. Democracy could flourish if Iraq is made into two or three countries, but like Yugoslavia the differences in one country can only be held together by a strong dictator. When Tito died, the end for Yugoslavia was just around the corner. Holding the Shiites and Kurds together at opposite ends of the country can only be accomplished by a strong man or a miracle worker. When it comes to diplomatic miracles, this administration has shown a short supply. We must remember that Great Britain created Iraq more than 70 years ago and at the same time it also created Jordan. Neither country was designed for a democratic government and neither has one.

Even less realistic is the dream that once Iraq becomes a democracy, its form of government will be infectious and spread across the Middle East. This area of the world isn't populated by large numbers of educated people, but Iraq happens to be one of the countries that has one of the best foundations for a modern society. Also its neighbor, Iran, has the makings of a population that could become democratic. But don't expect the mullahs in that country to roll over and allow a democracy to replace the religious control they have over society.

Even the mention of democracy runs a chill down the backs of the Saudi royal family and Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad who, like his father, will quickly kill the people advocating a democratic movement. Even our good friend King Abdullah II of Jordan would have strong reservations about allowing the growing number of Palestinians and other groups determine if he should rule. A truly democratic society in Egypt is also far down the road. Let's not even think about democracy getting a foothold in Libya.

Just meeting the humanitarian needs of a defeated Iraq will take large sums of money. Saddam has allowed the health and welfare of his people to deteriorate beyond belief. The war will only make this situation worse at first and it will take great effort to provide for basic needs of Iraq's population of 24 million. At this time it's estimated that at least half of the people rely on Saddam for food handouts. Suddenly Americans and Brits are their only source of food.

Today we are learning that promoting good government and control of Afghanistan is a bigger job than first anticipated. There is good reason to believe that, despite our efforts in that country, it will take billions of dollars, many failures and a couple of decades before our efforts will show any semblance of success.

It will take even more money, patience and almost as many years to see democratic changes in and around Iraq. Our planners can dream on, but they first must win the war with as few casualties as possible and provide adequate humanitarian aid for a start. After that, the difficult job will be to fulfill their dreams about a swelling tide of democracy in the Middle East. They had better hope it doesn't become just one more nightmare.