Setting the Record Straight on Federalism in Iraq
Last week, the Senate overwhelmingly approved the Biden-Brownback amendment to the Defense Authorization bill, which says it should be U.S. policy to support a political settlement in Iraq based upon the principles of federalism. The 75-23 bi-partisan vote, including 26 Republicans, marked the first time this year that the Senate has passed an Iraq-related policy measure.
Since then, some political leaders in Iraq have misunderstood the amendment. Instead of working to clear up any misunderstandings about the Senate amendment, the U.S. embassy in Baghdad issued a statement that dangerously mischaracterizes it.
Let's set the record straight:
First, the Biden-Brownback amendment does not call for the partition of Iraq. To the contrary, it calls for keeping Iraq together by bringing to life the federal system enshrined in its Constitution. Partition, or the complete break-up of Iraq, is something wholly different than federalism. A federal Iraq is a united Iraq, but one in which power is devolved to regional governments with a limited central government responsible for protecting Iraq's borders and oil distribution. It leaves the door open for stronger unity if and when passions cool, as we're seeing in the Balkans. Nor does the amendment call for dividing Iraq along sectarian lines. Rather, it calls for helping Iraqis implement their own Constitution, which provides for any of Iraq's 18 provinces to form regions and sets out the extensive powers of those regions and the limited powers of the central government. The result could be three regions, or four or five or more. It will be up to the Iraqi people.
Second, the amendment is not a foreign imposition. Iraqis already have made the decision to decentralize in their Constitution and federalism law. My amendment is about what the United States should do to help promote a political settlement consistent with these Iraqi decisions. Again, it will be up to the Iraqis. But the idea that the United States -- with 160,000 troops in Iraq, 3,804 dead and nearly 28,000 wounded -- does not have a right and responsibility to voice its views and to push for a political settlement is absurd.
Third, the amendment will not produce "bloodshed and suffering" in Iraq. It is hard to imagine more bloodshed and suffering than we've already seen, which has been exacerbated by the failure of Iraq's leaders to stop sectarian violence and produce a durable, widely accepted political settlement. More than 4 million Iraqis have already fled their homes for fear of sectarian violence, at a rate now of 100,000 every month. The whole purpose of my amendment is to end that bloodshed and suffering by promoting a power sharing arrangement that meets the interests of all Iraqis and gives them more local control over their daily lives.
The Bush administration is pursuing a fatally flawed policy in trying to create a strong central government in Iraq. There has been no significant reconciliation at the national level and there is no evidence that it will happen any time soon. Insisting on this failed approach will prolong and deepen Iraq's civil war, lead to a wider regional war, and irresponsibly increase the danger to over 160,000 American troops who are caught in the middle.
A few weeks ago I met top officials in Iraq -- Sunni, Shi'a and Kurdish. All of them expressed to me their support for federalism as called for in the Iraqi Constitution and its federalism law.
I believe my plan offers the best chance for the U.S. to leave Iraq without leaving chaos behind. You can read more about my plan at www.PlanForIraq.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Professor of Iraqi history, Dr Husain, tells us that Senator Biden's plan would be very popular in Iraq if it were properly understood and if the word federalism, which carries negative connotations in the Arab world, was replaced with the Arabic word "Hilaywa"--the use of which would instantly produce in the mind of Iraqis what is presently envisioned by the Biden plan.
Dr Hussain also agrees with Senator Biden that regions must be set up by the Iraqi people themselves and he points out that these regions already exist and have existed there for hundreds of years. Primarly defined by geograpic features, there are four main regions in Iraq which bear historical significance in the lives of the Iraqi people. Senator Biden has said (see his comments above) that the number and the composition of the regions are of little importance as it is the concept of federalism that is the main thrust of his plan.
And the word "plan" is what has been missing in action. No one else has dared to offer any sort of an actual and comprehensive plan that balances all the competing forces and interests and has the realistic potential of bringing to an end the sectarian violence that continues to fuel our current President's ambitions in the region.
Biden's plan puts the screws to all of those who see selfish opportunity in continuing the unsustainable.
And you just have to love the poetic justice in that.
Do you have a link for these statements? Who is Dr. Hussain?
You had better stop smoking that stuff!
"But the idea that the United States -- with 160,000 troops in Iraq, 3,804 dead and nearly 28,000 wounded -- does not have a right and responsibility to voice its views and to push for a political settlement is absurd."
Sorry, but I disagree, we don't have any rights in someone else's country. The fact that we chose, without provocation, to attack Iraq does not grant us any rights, quite the contrary, in my mind. They are not demanding we stay, we can leave anytime we like if we don't agree with them and their policies.
We indeed do not have a right to be militarily in Iraq, Hawkeye. The very facts you cite "we chose, without provocation to attack Iraq" are the reason we have a responsibility, if not obligation, to help Iraq accomplish political stability. "We can leave any time we like..." Can we do that ethically after the damage we've done there? We need as a nation to plan foreign policy solutions that are the right thing to do if we are to restore our country's damaged reputation in the eyes of the world.
Grow up and come to 2007. Stop hoping the war last longer so you can be sanctimonious and pooh-poohing a viable plan.
"We can leave anytime we like."
Really? How? Just tell the soldiers to pack and meet at the airport? Should we leave Blackwater there? What about the multitude of American contractors? Stay or go? And what about the Iraqis that helped us? Do we give them visas to the U.S.? Maybe you could post your candidates plan for withdrawl so we can all read and be enlightened.
Stabilization is of the utmost importance. If you don't see that then you are not paying attention....to what is happening NOW.
Thank you, Senator Biden, for clarifying what is confusing for many, myself included. As always, you continue to have my support.
I'm waiting for the day when MSM - and places like HuffingtonPost - wake up and start giving all the candidates the coverage they deserve, not just the 'front-runners'. You certainly deserve more coverage than they give you. Best of luck!
Amen to that!!
The ENTIRE media; press,TV, and radio treat the Presendency as a horserace.
It's demeaning, and a dis-service to our country.
Joe has done well in the debates, has good ideas on Iraq and HOW TO BE AN EFFECTIVE Executive(mandatory to getting things done in DC)
yet he is ignored.
So we'll get another so-so, or unquailied President.
Makes me wanna cry for the USA
Thank you Senator Biden for standing up to Maliki.
To all the people that are happy that Maliki dissed Biden's amendment - WAKE UP -
Maliki is in Bush's pocket. Of course he is going to be against this. This amendment will take away some of his power... and his paycheck.
I too have read alot of support for Biden's plan from Sunni and Shi'ite leaders, and even more importantly from the Iraqi people.
Look deeper than the MSM people.
Thank you Senator Biden for posting here! You can count on my vote.
Me 2.
Senator Biden,
Thank you for your plan. It may be too little, too late, however.
The Iraq war is already lost but the President promises "permanent occupation," according to the NYT editorial on September 14, 2007. This plan is unacceptable to most Iraqis.
The President's policy is bound up with ambitions to control the oil-rich Middle East, according to Alan Greenspan. Most Americans agree with that assessment. So do most Iraqis.
Over two million Iraqis have left their homes.
Every day the occupation lasts, the danger of an attack on Iran increases. A true humanitarian crisis has been created in Iraq by the invasion and occupation. More Iraqis and Americans die every day.
The elite in the U.S. are not willing to bite the bullet and admit that there is no military solution in Iraq. The proposed PSAs for control of the oil are one-sided in favor of the oil majors. The war was a mistake. Withdrawal is called for but the domestic consequences politically speaking are to great. The story is so similar to the Vietnam war that it confirms that the lessons of history will repeat themselves again and again if we learn nothing from history.
The majority of the people in the United States favor a withdrawal and have lost confidence in a U.S. "victory."
Your plan is like placing Native Americans on the Reservation after taking their lands. Let the Iraqis decide what to do with their country and their oil. We are part of the problem, not part of the solution. Dire predictions of disaster pale in comparison with the disaster of continued occupation.
Let's hold those responsible who promoted the war and heal the American psyche before the next debacle brought on by these ideologues who want to rob the Iraqis of their oil.
And while we're doing all that, let's vote for Joe Biden for President, just in case he doesn't get the problem solved before January 2009.
If you follow Biden's discussions on the Iraq War you'll find you're pretty much in agreement.
Let's not fall for the "frontrunners"; let's choose the person who knows what to do next.
Senator Biden, I disagree with your characterization of a legitimate Iraqi government.
How can it be legitimate when this "government" is governing under the coercive influence of illegal US occupation?
You wrote:
"Iraqis already have made the decision to decentralize in their Constitution and federalism law."
There is a glaringly obvious problem with this assertion.
Iraqis are getting slaughtered left and right, so how can legitimate governance be taking place while Bush threatens to topple Maliki and BlackWater roams Iraq, shooting people arbitrarily?
Senator:
I also disagree with the term "legitimate" Iraq government.
-The CPA refused to do a census, to prepare for a national vote.
-Local NewsPapers and other Media outlets [TV and Radio] were closed by the CPA [U.S. Army]
-Communities and towns in Iraq, which had elected their own representatives had their choices Voided by the CPA [U.S. Army]
-The base constitutional laws, were written by the CPA [Bremer et al] for the protection of U.S. interests, not the nation of Iraq.
-The current Key members of the Iraqi government were returned to Iraq [after years of living abroad] and sponsored by the U.S. government.
They are exclusively guarded by the U.S. Mercenary Army of Blackwater Employees.
-The U.S. government has allowed one of Mr. Bush's closest friends to sign an exclusive Oil deal with the Kurds. This was done in defiance of the wishes of your so-called legitimate Iraqi Central government.
There is no "Legitimate Government" in Iraq and therein lies an inescapable problem with your approach.
Great to hear from you here, Senator BIDEN...
I am a long-time and avid supporter (as those who comment here can testify!), and as such receive your campaign's e-mails on a regular basis...This is a venue that hopefully can bring your message/solutions CLEARLY, without the distortions and disinterest of the mainstream media.
I don't purport to even begin to understand the complexities and nuances of the political situation in the Middle East the way someone with your experience does, and I also don't understand how others NOT involved can presume to supercede your experience and judgement on this subject.
If I understand correctly, what this represents is a governmental structure not unlike the United States or Canada has...Is that correct? (Some of us need a specific frame of reference to crystalize abstract ideas!)
And to those out there who aren't listening, (like duboisist, apparently),I don't know how many ways you can say more clearly than you have that a federalist structure is ALREADY in IRAQ's constitution... We ARE NOT telling them what to do.
And, as for mosh, here's the logicl point that MUST be understood about these funding votes:
> MRAPs UNEQUIVOCALLY SAVE AMERICAN LIVES.
> EVEN IF WE BEGAN WITHDRAWING RIGHT THIS MINUTE, OBVIOUSLY NOT EVERY SOLDIER CAN GO HOME FIRST... DO YOU THINK THOSE WHO ARE THE LAST TO BE BROUGHT HOME SHOULD BE BROUGHT HOME IN FLAG-DRAPED COFFINS (they all come through Senator Biden' home-state DOVER AFB, btw), JUST BECAUSE THEY WERE UNLUCKY ENOUGH TO BE IN THE LAST ROTATIONS OUT?...BECAUSE YOU WANTED THE SENATE TO MAKE A POLITICAL POINT AND NOT PROTECT THEM?
...WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE???...
This isn't about funding for bullets, as one of Bill Mahers' guests spouted last week.
Even Senator Jim Webb has voted with Senator Biden on these funding issues...DOESN'T THAT TELL YOU SOMETHING?
Again, Thanks, Senator BIDEN...godspeed.
Qualities + Qualifications + Experience = CHANGE.
Truth to Power --> Power to the People.
BIDEN/Richardson >>> All the Above.
I've also been a very avid supporter of Senator Biden. Now, if you've been following the debates you can tell that Biden doesn't think that highly of Gov. Richardson - and I would say with good cause - so we will not be seeing a Biden/ Richardson ticket. Let's just see if we can get Biden the nomination, and unlike any of the other candidates if Biden actually gets the nomination it won't matter who his VP is. He'll win it going away.
Richardson has been typical of the unrealistic children in the Democratic party. He tries to appeal to the far left (many of whom you'll find on this site), but he could never do what he promises. He's also been surprisingly a horrendous performer in the debates.
Biden, as was said recently in an Editorial in some newspaper or other, is the grown up in the race. Unfortunately, it's been tough to get this message through to the masses who are mostly child like in their beliefs.
BIDEN/OBAMA 08
Today, Tomorrow, Together.
"A federal Iraq is a united Iraq, but one in which power is devolved to regional governments with a limited central government responsible for protecting Iraq's borders and oil distribution."
It's also a pipe-dream. No intention here to impugn your motives, but federations of this type simply do not exist, nor do they come into existence in the circumstances we see now in Iraq.
Also, I have no idea what you mean by this: "It leaves the door open for stronger unity if and when passions cool, as we're seeing in the Balkans."
Are you refering to the former Yugoslavia, gradually fracturing into its constituent ethnic/religious/nationalistic pieces? What we see in the Balkans is a near perfect example of partition, certainly not unity. Indeed partition perhaps brought the most recent wars there to an end.
But I also must break from the lovefest here... I didn't like the amendment. It is giving people false hope. I think highly of you, and I think you would make a great diplomat, but this amendment probably prolonged our occupation of Iraq.
Federalism is a terrific concept, but the hard truth is that federalism as we know it functions in very very few countries anywhere on the planet. I just think it is pure folly to believe that it can take root in Iraq, and it would be grossly irresponsible to keep our troops there laboring under this hope.
Mr. Biden.
I am a conservative and have been and continue to be an advocate for this plan.
This only goes to reaffirm my belief that you are on eof the two dems that I beleive are truely qualified to be POTUS.
As a conservative,I am greatful that your party will never allow you to be its nominee. And I will never understand why that is.
I’m just curious… who is the 2nd Dem you think is qualified, and are you talking about all Dems or just the Dems running for prez?
You’re right about Biden in both cases. He is the most qualified Democrat ready to be POTUS; and as a conservative if you want a Republican to win you should be truly grateful if Biden doesn’t get the nomination because you know that he would be the toughest Democrat to beat in a general election.
Sorry, correction, obviously I meant to say the Shi'ites in Basra, not Anbar.
Senator Biden
When will some Congressman stand up to AIPAC and the coercing of the USA into yet another war against Iran based on LIES???
And as far as your MSM is concerned when will they start reporting NEWS and not the BS that is fed them?
I can certainly say that this is the best plan I've yet seen to get us out of Iraq, but there are a few problems with it.
First, the proposal seems to revolve around oil. This is unavoidable, as oil is a central part of nearly any discussion of the Middle East. However, I can see major problems occurring once the oil starts running out. At best, this proposal will create a temporary peace in Iraq. Also, oil does a lot for the wealth of a country, but very little for the wealth of its people.
Second, as others have mentioned, the borders of Iraq are arbitrary to the Iraqis, as they were defined by Europeans. They shouldn't have to keep the status quo just because it makes things simpler. If you remember, the genocide in Rwanda was based on an arbitrary distinction made by Europeans. On the other hand, the United States turned out alright with state borders set in place by the British, so it's possible that the same could happen in Iraq. The point is, the decision whether or not to remain as one country is up to the Iraqis, not us. Should they choose to split up their country à la India and Pakistan, who are we to stop them?
I'm glad someone has finally set out a detailed plan for an exit strategy in Iraq (which we should have had in the first place!), to at least get the ball rolling and get some discussion on the topic. The problems I've mentioned here are not necessarily flaws in your plan, but flaws that are at the core of conflict in the Middle East. We can't be expected to solve all the world's problems, but we do have a responsibility to clean up our mess in Iraq. So far, this is the best proposal I've seen to do that. Thank you, Senator!
to get to the heart of the matter, it is all about OIL. And OIL is all the Iraqis/Iraq have. I do support Biden, pity people with substance cannot become president of the United States in these times of pettiness and popularity contests.
You are wrong about the oil.
Right now Iraqi oil is flowing just fine, and into other Arab countries.
Is it helping to rebuild Iraq - hell no.
Just look up Hunt Oil.
Biden's plan specifically say that oil revenues should be shared.
Which is 100% better than what is going on now.
Thank you Senator Biden, for actually trying to do something about the mess we have created.
Until now, we have had "stay the course" on the one hand, and "get out now" on the other. Both will lead to much more blood spilled. At the last debate, a new variation emerged: "maybe stay through 2013." I have no idea what the frontrunners have in mind. It is all very well to heap deserved criticism on the Bush administration for its stupidity and arrogance, but that is not a plan.
I feel that we have a moral responsibility to try to help the Iraqis if they will let us. If they will not respond to this, or any other, idea for a political settlement, then we cannot help them and we should stop the loss of life on our side.
I was glad to hear you say at the debate that if there was no such settlement. you would start pulling troops out in January 2009. I wish that ultimatum could be delivered today instead of over a year from now.
Senator Biden, I supported the original Biden+Gelb plan for three autonomous regions in Iraq back in May 2006 as can be evidenced in my blog post:
http://politicalpotpourri.blogspot.com/2006/05/seinfeld-option-on-iran-and-biden-gelb.html
However, that plan made good sense 17 months ago. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since then - most notably, the ethnic cleansing in the larger Baghdad area. We have further aided this soft partitioning, by building hard walls around Baghdad neighborhoods to keep ethnic enclaves separate and safe. It seems to me we are more or less down the road to a hard partitioning of Iraq.
This need not become a north-south divide like Korea or Vietnam, but an east-west divide like Germany. Baghdad becomes the new Berlin - a divided capital to the Sunni West and the Shia East. Saddam wanted Kuwait as a province - the tables are now turned. Anbar province (i.e. the Sunni West) could eventually become a province of Kuwait. The Shia East can become a protectorate of Shia Iran - it's almost there, anyway. The Kurdish North can eventually become an independent nation with Kirkuk as its capital.
This is a more radical proposal, but as you know desperate diseases require desperate remedies. The realistic part of this solution is that the the United States can maintain some troops in both - the friendly Sunni West and the friendly Kurdish North until and after the hard partition occurs - to protect its long-term interests in the Middle East.
Say, it will work, Joe.
What is the significance of the fact that the Iraqi parliament has voted overwhelmingly to reject your resolution? And bitterly resents any interference or appearance of interference in Iraqi political issues by the United States - if the Iraqi's themselves reject this model, we are back to the failing Bush strategy.
Please Senator Biden, rethink your position on funding and vote to end this war now - can't you see what millions of Americans already know - that the best way to protect our troops is to bring them home ASAP not up-armor their vehicles and keep them there. Please seriously reconsider.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
