From: Gail Brock
My imaginings at this point run as follows: We enforce the human rights that are incorporated in international declarations and treaties. Everything else is left to the Iraquis. ^^^^^^^ CB: I agree with your proposal. Unfortunately, the main opponent of enforcing universal human rights and supporter of oppression in Iraq or anywhere would be the very Iraq-ruling United States that would have to agree to this plan. A main problem is that the generally recognized universal human rights contained in UN conventions include the right to a living -job, work or income, housing, health care, etc.- which would pretty much rule out a market economy. _________
You're right, of course, but I'm working on the imagining and where it leads in terms of realistic positions -- should we just get the hell out now, or stay till some structure of order is reestablished, or try to get the UN to collaborate in the occupation? I'm tending towards asking the UN to take over, because the U.S. is, as you say, a main opponent of enforcing universal human rights, especially the economic ones.
The U.S. will have to make concessions to get the UN to agree to get involved. I think the U.S. public is going to want out of Iraq quickly enough that the deteriorating situation may force the government to do what is necessary to get other nations to agree to be involved -- yes, Bremer's envisioning the multi-nationals profiting from a fire sale of Iraqi assets, but the profits will still depend on more order than I think the U.S. can enforce.
Dubya has been talking about how we will provide the Iraqis with health care, jobs, so for the U.S. to suddenly object to providing Iraqis with the right to a living will take some heavy propaganda to fly.
--Gail
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com