Fantasy 'Progress' In Iraq

This is from the Boston Herald today. A yardstick on the capacity of the US media for self-deception, delusion and spin. No further comment necessary - quoted verbatim. 

Now that Iraq has a real government nine months after national elections, a coalition of all the major parties, analysts right and left are spotlighting this and that future worry. Is Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki too authoritarian? Will the parliament pass a law governing the oil industry and its revenues? Will the Kurds stay in Iraq? And on and on. But the achievement ought to be recognized for the important step it is, a series of interlocking agreements among opponents who a few years ago were at each other’s throats. 

The hardest thing in the establishment of a new government is the creation and recognition of the loyal opposition. Countries that don’t manage it often have a turbulent history, as France did after the Revolution of 1789. Countries that do manage it, as the English Tories and Whigs did after the “Glorious Revolution” of 1688 that brought William of Orange to the throne, may do better. Such a recognition may be an outgrowth of the latest coalition agreements.

Naturally, nine months struck many observers as inappropriate for the gestation of a government. But the Iraqis have not had much practice with real politics. The omens are not bad. Violence, still a problem, did not increase during the nine months. Al-Maliki, the head of a Shiite grouping that finished second in the sections, has appointed numerous Sunnis to important posts. Under dictator Saddam Hussein, Iraq was the most secular of all the Arab states and probably will remain so. Al-Qaeda’s attempt to take over Anbar province was met by the Sunni awakening which crushed the cruel newcomers.

Iraq could descend into chaos again. But the chances of that happening grow smaller with each passing day.