Chalabi said WHAT?
I have to admit to being a bit thrown by Ahmad Chalabi's sudden switch to a position favorable to early elections. As the single currently active Iraqi politician with the most to lose from real democratic elections, you'd expect Chalabi to continue with what his game had been up to a few days ago: lobbying in Washington to get the Governing Council appointed the new sovereign rulers of Iraq.
Why did he switch? Chalabi's support for the idea is almost enough to make me rethink my own support for the idea. I still think early elections are the only good option, and remain highly skeptical of all the excuses, um, I mean arguments against them. But I worry about being the guy in the immortal Loud Family song that you've never heard, wailing after the fact that "That was my mistake - I didn't spot the setup!"
The best theory that I've got right now is nothing but a theory: that Chalabi, the consummate opportunist, has put his finger to the wind and has realized that the elections are most likely going to happen regardless of what he wants, and this is a way for him to score some points as "a genuine democrat" while also being able to brag later about how he used his "influence in Washington" to get results. But that's just a theory.
Il Gattopardo
Posted by: paper_tigress | January 25, 2004 at 11:01 AM
In the novel, Il Gattopardo, by Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, Prince Fabrizio of Sicily votes in a plebecite (made possible by the upheaval of the Italian Risorgimento) despite his convictions. The character is famous for saying, 'if we want things to remain the same, everything must change.'
Posted by: paper_tigress | January 25, 2004 at 06:18 PM
In the novel, Il Gattopardo, by Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa, Prince Fabrizio of Sicily votes in a plebecite (made possible by the upheaval of the Italian Risorgimento) despite his convictions. The character is famous for saying, 'if we want things to remain the same, everything must change.'
Posted by: paper_tigress | January 25, 2004 at 06:18 PM