Nine days to go, and the UN warns that the lack of international observers could undermine the election results.
Seriously, are they going to go through with this? Shouldn't they actually evaluate the security of the situation there and then decide, rather than go ahead with their aribitrarially choosen post-US election date?
2 comments:
While I agree with you completely, I think it should be mentioned that there is a bit more to it than the arbitrary setting of a date by the U.S. A major concern is that there is a deadline in both the Iragi interim constitution and a U.N. resolution concerning the Iraq. One of the problems seems to be that if they postpone the election, there will be a serious question of breaking international and Iraqi law.
Not that I think this is the motivation for Bush. I think he's still trying to choreagraph an election so that he can claim a victory for "democracy." He does seem to think that the illusion of freedom is better than the reality.
The deadline might not be arbitrary but it still seems quite unreasonable given our failure to provide security. I would assume that that would be a precondition to having a fair and accurate election, though to be honest I don't see us restoring security at any point soon. Guess this might be one of those grin and bare it moments. GWB's inevitable trumpeting of the election as "freedom on the march" is what really gets to me.
Post a Comment