Reconstruction

The AP is reporting that the interim government in Iraq decided to bar 30,000 Ba'ath Party members from holding jobs in the new Iraqi government. This strikes me as sort of familiar. Now where have we seen this before?

1865. Certain members of the former Confederate government were banned from holding office in the New South. It was part of the process known as Reconstruction.

By barring some of the best and brightest from government, the US government essentially helped to retard the growth of the South. Not everyone caught up in the Reconstruction ban was a Jefferson Davis.

And not all 30,000 of the Ba'athists barred from the new Iraqi government is a Saddam Hussein. Many of the people were simply Iraqi bureaucrats trying to find some way to get ahead and to improve their lot in life. The Party was seen as a way of doing that. So they joined.

Somewhere in Iraq are the files of the Ba'ath Party telling who was really important and who had just paid their dues to get the card. There is a difference between a full-fledged member and a diehard, hardcore zealot. The zealots are the ones we want to ban.

I believe that the Reconstruction of Iraq is going to be hard enough without handicapping ourselves further by getting rid of some good people arbitrarily.

Although, I have to admit, that I can't disagree too, too much with the decision. The decision was obviously well thought out, including the consequences of the decision. That's very important to see. Too many choices are made without a real acknowledgement of the consequences of that decision.

Plus, this will give some lower level bureaucrats an opportunity to move up and to fill higher, better paying positions. And it's not as if there will be a problem because of it. Remember, people don't make the bureaucracy, the bureaucracy makes the people. The government will still continue to function so long as there are people in the positions. Vacant positions are the only thing that can kill a bureaucracy.

Barring some Ba'athist from the new government is the prudent thing to do. There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam should not be able to even get a job in the Department of Sanitation Engineering. But 30,000 people just seems excessive to me.

The removal of intelligence and ambition in the South during Reconstruction led to a slower growth in the area and to lingering feelings of disrespect (some of which still exist even today). That is not the type of legacy we want to leave in Iraq.

I think we need to be a bit more judicious in our condemnation of Iraqi bureaucrats. A blanket condemnation isn't fair or good enough. Give them due process. Allow them the benefit of the doubt.

To paraphrase my opinion on the death penalty: I would rather let 100 committed Ba'athists to retain positions in the bureaucracy than to condemn one wannabe Ba'athist unfairly.