My colleague Patrick Basham argues that the "upcoming Iraqi election foretells stillborn democracy." Basham claims that

the interim government has proven unpopular and illegitimate in the eyes of ordinary Iraqis. Members of the interim government are viewed, as were their predecessors in the failed Governing Council, as puppets of the Bush administration.

I'm not sure where Basham gets his information, but a poll by the International Republican Institute earlier this month found differently:

Recent public opinion surveys conducted by IRI show Iraqis to be surprisingly optimistic about their future and much stronger supporters of democracy than many new reports would lead you to believe.

Over 51% of Iraqis polled felt that their country is headed in "the right direction," up slightly from IRI's May/June poll. More telling, the number who feel that things are heading in "the wrong direction" has dropped from 39% to 31% over the same time period.

Some of this confidence may be a result of wide public support for the Iraqi Interim Government. Prime Minister Allawi holds an enviable approval rating, with 66% rating him as either "very effective" or "somewhat effective." Likewise, President al-Yawer enjoys the support of 60.6% of Iraqis polled who say that they "completely trust" or "somewhat trust" him.

In a stunning display of support for democracy and a strong rebuttal to critics of efforts to bring democratic reform to Iraq, 87% of Iraqis indicated that they plan to vote in January elections. Expanding on the theme, 77% said that "regular, fair elections" were the most important political right for the Iraqi people and 58% felt that Iraqi-style democracy was likely to succeed.

Looking forward to the drafting of the new constitution, a cumulative 67% place a strong importance on the preservation of a unified state, with 56% citing this as issue of primary importance. On the role of religion in determining the new constitution, while support for Shiri'a law is strong at nearly 70%, there is divided opinion on whether the government should create a secular state that respects the rights of all religious, tribal and ethnic groups with 49% agreeing and 40% disagreeing.

Support for political parties remains largely undefined with 80% not identifying with any political party. In determining who they would support, a large plurality of Iraqis, nearly 45%, say that a militia attached to a political party would make them less inclined to vote for that party. Only 7% indicated that the presence of a militia would make them more inclined to support a party. Among those polled, religious leaders enjoyed the support of 30% as possible election candidates, with university professors (24%) and party leaders (15.5%) rounding out the top three preferences. Iraqis further indicated a strong preference for "modern" (64%) versus "traditional" (18%) candidates, while also preferring "religious" (69%) candidates to "secular" (24%) ones.

Basham points out that elections across the whole country are not feasible because of the security situation, whereas partial elections will disenfranchise a portion of the electorate and cause further division. Moreover,

according to Allawi, Fallujah's residents could take part in elections "after we liberate them from terrorists." But the liberation of Fallujah from those guilty of terrorist acts and terrorist sympathies will require the removal of most Fallujans. A genuinely democratic vote would result in an overwhelming endorsement of those cloaked in Baathist-friendly colors.

Ah, but there's nothing wrong with the Sunnis voting for Baathists, if they want to. That's what's so brilliant about democracy: it coopts the opposition. Baathist-friendly the candidates may be, but their power would depend on people voting for them, and they would have to join coalitions to get what they want, and obey the law, like the former Communists in eastern Europe who are now ordinary democratic politicians. David Brooks says it better than I can in an excellent column about the resilience of democracy.

Arthur Chrenkoff moves away from the violence that journalists are addicted to covering and captures the deeper story: "post-totalitarian stress disorder," the slow and fitful but wondrous process by which people discover what it is to be free. Chrenkoff has tons of links. Meanwhile, Mark Steyn reminds us of the alternative "a half-century of American "realpolitik" in the Middle East — the absurd inflation of the Saudi "royal" family, the lavish subsidies to the Mubaraks — brought us 9/11. The foreign-policy realists turned out to be totally unreal."

Basham may turn out to be right. To some extent, the flurry of journalism on Iraq is pointless: we can discern the good guys and bad guys in the current situation (hint: the bad guys murder large numbers of civilians) but only future historians with five, ten, twenty years' hindsight will be able to offer a complete story. Particularly because what's happening in Iraq is something new under the sun. Post-WWII Germany and Japan are the closest analogies but they still fall short. This soldier's letter, quoted on Iraq the Model, was eye-opening, and mind-boggling:

Dear Dad:

1. Not much to report on here in Najaf. Its been quite but we have heard about things being hot in other parts of Iraq so we are still being vigilant. Just recently the Mosques here in Najaf have re-opened and people are returning to them for prayer for the first time in almost a year. When the militia came into the city they took over the Mosques and used them as hideouts, even though it's against their own religious beliefs to use a holy site in such a way, but they did so because they knew that we wouldn't bomb there. The people kept asking us to just go in and get them, but we didn't want to destroy their Mosque, and some of my friends died as a result of sniper fire from inside, but we know it was the right thing to do.
As we were driving through the city on a security patrol the other day we drove by the newly re-opened Mosque. As we drove by many people came out and waved at us and some parents even held up their children and said "thank you America." I remember thinking that how lucky I was to be able to be from a country where I don't have to worry about someone using my church as a battle position, or that someone might shoot me and my family for trying to go to church. Some times I forget how lucky I am and I can't ever believe that I thought of going to church as being a "chore" We should feel blessed to be able to go in and pray as we choose. And I thank God every day that you and my family are safe and sound in the U.S. I love you guys so much that I would gladly lay down my life so that you never loose a single freedom that you enjoy today. And if anything should happen to me, don't worry there are a lot of guys like me out there who will never let that happen.

Lately we have been doing public affairs stuff, going around to different schools and seeing what kinds of stuff they need to be fixed. Things like desks and chalkboards and stuff. The hard part is dealing with all the little kids that come out to see us and they all think that we are going to be giving away food and candy. And it's not like it's just a couple of kids, we get mobbed by like a hundred kids. Instead of more candy or chocolate or stuff me , if you could send some basic school supply stuff to me we can get it right to the school kids. Things like pens, pencils, protractors, rulers, etc and we will get it out. I will also get some pictures of the kids for you that I will send. Oh, and don't forget those little hand held pencil sharpeners. Apparently they need some of those too......

Love,
David Jr

"Imperialist" soldiers, global symbols of violence... yet they're going around to schools, delivering supplies, like I did once on a World Bank mission to Malawi. The phrase "beating swords into plowshares" rings in my head. What does it mean? for the war effort? for the world? for the human soul? I don't know, but I'm excited to find out.

In any case, I trust that we're all with Allawi, we're all hoping for the same thing.