sy hersh in the new yorker

this week's new yorker features a new piece by respected investigative journalist sy hersh on attempts by the bush administration to influence the outcome of iraq's elections. hersh broke the my lai masacre story in 1969, and later the abu ghraib stories. he reports that u.s. administrators in iraq were under deadline to produce elections, but the country's post-war condition couldn't insure that they'd run smoothly.

"the administration was faced with a basic dilemma: the likely winner of a direct and open election would be a shiite religious party. the shiite's were bitter opponents of saddam's regime, and suffered under it, but many shiite religious and political leaders are allied, to varying degrees, with the mullahs
of iran."

while sunnis are an ethnic minority in iraq, they largely retained control of the country under saddam. voters in iraq had very little access to information about individual candidates and tended to votes based on their ethnic identity. u.s. officials feared the majority shiites would fill out the new government creating charges of ethnic imbalance and potentially fostering clashes and ethnic repression. as hersh notes, the administration also feared too much influence from iran based on their friendly ties with the the shiites.

hersh's sources said millions of dollars were funneled to iyad allawi, the former acting prime minister friendly to the united states but viewed as a weak candidate. shadowy channels were used to avoid having to disclose the payments to congress, according to one source. it's reasonable that the administration would want to keep out of the new government elements it percieved to be radical and associated with the "axis of evil."

but an n.g.o. representative makes a good point:

"as an iraqi who supported the use of force to overthrow saddam, i can tell you that as long as real democratic practices are not adhered to, you americans cannot talk about democracy."

photo: graham jepson