Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 5 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
By John Kiser Special to the Rappahannock News
There id an honorable wdy
out of Iraq. It’s called democracy. The problem is that it means showing enough respect for Iraqis to let them decide the future of the American military presence. It means letting ordinary Iraqis decide if the risks associated with the withdrawal of American troops are less than the risks of still greater chaos if they stay.
A vote is planned in October for the new constitution that is supposed to be drafted this summer. Why not add to the process what, in effect would be a referendum on the US military occupation? Allow Iraqis to . vote on the timetable of withdrawal: immediate, within 18 months, stay as long as needed. America would still be committed to providing reconstruction money, the spending priorities and implementation would be determined by Iraqis - as with the Europeans under the Marshall Plan. It would be their plan, not ours. US expertise is on tap but not on top. America, wo.uld look and be magnanimous. Generosity of spirit is highly valued in the Arab world.
It could be embarrassing to the Bush administration if the vote was for American troops to leave, but democracy doesn’t always produce the results one wants. Allowing the Iraqis to decide would make the administration’s rhetoric about promoting democracy credible - we are even wiling to apply it to ourselves. Sacre bleu!
On the other hand, if the vote is in favor of the US staying for awhile, that should be subject to reaffirmation every, say, two years. More importantly, it would temporarily legitimize the US presence, one that was initially welcomed if never invited. The big question is whether our presence is making the situation worse or better. Again, let the Iraqis decide.
96.0%