Excellent post Cernig, though I have to disagree with the last bit. The main problems with Maliki have been, from the start, that he doesn't have any real base of support within Iraq (as a former exile), and that he's a Shiite hardliner.

So he was never in a position to achieve anything except by painfully piecing together coalitions in a country that is badly fractured. And he's not trusted by the majority of those whose support he needs.

The idea that Maliki is lazy or incompetent or unwilling to do what he knows needs to be done, is a notion promulgated by the administration to explain the failure of their policy of backing Maliki. It's an excuse for Bush & Co. Instead, the truth is that Maliki was never in a position to achieve these things. His proposals were DOA last summer.

Bush and Cheney would like us to believe that they can turn things in Iraq around by tightening the screws on Maliki, and many Dems have bought into that idea. It's only by admitting that Maliki is incapable of pulling the country together, no matter how much we or he wishes to do so, that we'll be able to face up to what really needs to be done regarding our Iraq policy.
smintheus | Homepage | 05.13.07 - 3:19 pm | #

Hi smintheus, valid points. But my belief is that Malki is both unable and unwilling. Recall, please, the way the constitution was gerrymandered in the first place. He was a part of that process.

Regards, C
Cernig | Homepage | 05.13.07 - 3:29 pm | #

Thanks for the post, Cernig. I'm thrilled that we're going to be talking to Iran rather than bombing Iran.

p.s. I think you mean "impose", not "oppose"?
sfHeath | 05.13.07 - 3:41 pm | #

Hi sf, you're right, I did mean "impose". Fixed and thanks for the editors job.

Regards, C
Cernig | Homepage | 05.13.07 - 3:50 pm | #