The kidnapping yesterday was the most brazen move yet in a series of murders and attacks on Iraqi academics that are driving the country's human capital out of Iraq. In the past few weeks, a Sunni geologist and a university dean were murdered. The death toll of educators totals at least 155 since the war began in 2003. Academics are often targeted because of their prominent positions, their defenselessness and their views which frequently run counter to the beliefs of the Islamic fundamentalists carrying out much of the violence. This hostile climate towards Iraq's academic community-the very group of people critical to forming a stable democracy in Iraq-has driven thousands of researchers and professors to neighboring countries. Without them, who will educate the next generation of doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, politicians and business leaders, all of whom are necessary for future stability and freedom in Iraq?
If the insurgents and sectarian factions in Iraq succeed in driving out the only group-educators-that could mold Iraq into a successful nation, the remaining influential groups of people will be Islamic fundamentalists and partisan leaders, and the situation in Iraq will only worsen. As insurgent and sectarian violence grows more brutal and Iraq's political climate becomes more polarized, the fundamentalist and sectarian leaders gain more influence.
If Iraq falls into the hands of either of these groups, the form of government will likely be an authoritarian dictatorship like Saddam Hussein's or a theocracy like the Taliban administration. Either way, democracy in Iraq will have been a failed experiment precipitated by the United States. This failure would be terrible for the Iraqi people, who suffered under Saddam Hussein, who endured the U.S. war and occupation and who will face a leadership that could be as bad as Saddam Hussein's was.
If the United States pulls out of Iraq amidst this chaos-some would call it all-out civil war by this point-those who are causing all this violence will have succeeded. These outlaws, once they're finished fighting amongst themselves, will exert their influence and create a dangerous regime. The United States will be seen as the catalyst for the violence and instability that has plagued Iraq since 2003, and an authoritarian dictatorship or a theocracy will be seen as a stabilizing and desirable force.
Perhaps it would have been better to have pursued more U.N. sanctions and to have left Saddam Hussein largely to his own devices. This strategy may have caused less pain and suffering for both the Iraqi people and America. But there is no way to change what the Bush administration has done. The United States caused this war and the instability in Iraq, therefore it is the United States' responsibility to fix it. The prevailing winds in America seem to be blowing in a different direction, however: The next Senate majority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nevada), wants to start a withdrawal from Iraq in the next four to six months, while in an interview conducted by The New York Times, the incoming Armed Services Committee chairman Senator Carl Levin of Michigan said, "The point of this is to signal to the Iraqis that the open-ended commitment is over and that they are going to have to solve their own problems."
The problem with this line of reasoning is that the United States has created many of the problems that plague Iraq today. Although America is not responsible for the country's sectarian tensions, it was U.S. actions that lit the fuse for the current violence in this situation by invading Iraq without a good reconstruction plan. Since the U.S. is directly responsible for the unstable situation in Iraq, the United States must help Iraq through this difficult time.
Mike wrote this while studying for two econ quizzes and writing his religion paper. If you still want to give him a hard time, you can annoy him at mserviansky09@amherst.edu.