There’s a full-court press underway in Iraq to pull things together, and while it’s all quite fluid, this week has brought daily surprises. This morning is no exception (from WaPo):
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Wednesday proposed a limited amnesty to help end the Sunni Arab insurgency as part of a national reconciliation plan that Maliki said would be released within days. The plan is likely to include pardons for those who had attacked only U.S. troops, a top adviser said.
[snip]
Asked about clemency for those who attacked U.S. troops, he said: “That’s an area where we can see a green line. There’s some sort of preliminary understanding between us and the MNF-I,” the U.S.-led Multi-National Force-Iraq, “that there is a patriotic feeling among the Iraqi youth and the belief that those attacks are legitimate acts of resistance and defending their homeland. These people will be pardoned definitely, I believe.”
Polimom’s written about the difference between the Sunni-driven insurgency’s motives and that of al-Qaeda-type goals; their agendas could hardly be more different. Even if this aspect of an amnesty proposal turns out to be pure symbolism, it has the potential for rippling consequences.
There will doubtless be many Americans who will object to — and resent — any limited amnesty that includes those who targeted US troops. Indeed, some bloggers are already objecting. If there is to be victory in Iraq, though, they’re going to have to internally reconcile the sects and factions… and we’re going to have to support their efforts to do so.
More:
Similarly, the top Sunni Arab in Iraq’s new government said this week that he believed a peace deal was “very close.” Salam al-Zobaie, the deputy prime minister, said in an interview in his Baghdad office this week that the difference this time was that the new Shiite-led government was indicating openness to compromise.
Asked about proposals of amnesty for Sunni insurgents, Zobaie said the previous Shiite governments “closed the door” on the Sunnis “and forced them to take up the gun to defend themselves. We should be talking about an apology, not amnesty.”
While I doubt there will be any apologies forthcoming, Zobaie has clearly stated an aspect of the situation most Americans have perhaps not understood: the Sunnis – a minority in the population – had real fears about their future as participants in the new democracy.
So what will Americans (or Bush, for that matter) think of this idea?
Given that al Maliki put the amnesty possibility on the table immediately after Bush’s visit, it seems likely that Bush has already accepted it… and that, folks, is the way it should be. A unified Iraq with a democratically elected, inclusive government is about as good an outcome as there could possibly be.
Whether the Sunni insurgents will accept an officially waved white flag, of course, is another matter altogether.
Polimom is, as ever, leaving the debate of whether we should or should not be there at all on the back-burner until the current situation is dealt with. November is coming, and I expect feelings about our entrance into Iraq will grow louder as it approaches.
Polimom’s concerned, however, that the anger at the neocons (and I share it) could potentially undermine the fragile forward-progress we’re finally sensing in Iraq. Assuming (yes, yes… big assumption) that recent developments bear fruit, I hope there’s enough time for momentum to build before the elections this fall. Otherwise, we’ll remain stuck on “who dropped the glass” instead of “let’s clean up the mess”.
Some other thoughts about the Iraqi limited amnesty include:
The Gun Toting Liberal, who writes (in part):
This is where we we will learn if our President and his Administration are truly seeking peace and ready to back the will of the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people had spoken by electing this Prime Minister, and he is their “voice”. If the “voice” of the Iraqis is calling for brotherly love over brotherly murder, then that is what they shall get according to democratic doctrine. I would expect our own President to step aside and let the Iraqi people decide for themselves what is best for the Iraqi people.
At RightWing NutHouse, Rick Moran doesn’t like it, but
[…] all things considered, it may be the price of a full, unqualified victory in Iraq – a stable democratic government that promises full political participation for all Iraqis and that would be an example to follow for the rest of the autocratic Middle East.