Remember all that affirmative action fuss? Grutter v. Bollinger, Bakke, Supreme Court -- all frequently-used Google keywords a few months ago. Ever since the High Court made its decision, the affirmative action debate has vanished from the national spotlight only to reappear in the soporific Democratic primary. But with all this talk about democracy in Iraq, instilling freedom to a previously oppressed nation, dare we talk about affirmative action? Shi'ites will soon be in control of the nation; but should Sunnis, Kurds, Turks and Christians be given some sort of promised and guaranteed voice through an affirmative action program? We all know that free elections and freedom of speech are building blocks to democracy, but, in the case of Iraq, is affirmative action also part of the democratic equation?
Understanding Iraq's demographics and history helps in answering this question. Shi'ites make up roughly 60 percent of the Iraq population, Sunnis 17 percent. Working together in building a new Iraq will be difficult, primarily due to past wounds. In 1920, for instance, the Shi'ites partnered with the Sunni Sharifians and their leader King Faysal to rise up against British colonial rule. The tribal Shi'ites revolted but the British trampled them. Adding insult to injury, the British installed the Sunni Sharifians to rule Iraq. The Sunnis had been robbed. Then in 1958, the Baathists swept into power, raising large armies to domineer and check the Shi'ites, now robbed and subjugated.
In the spring of 2003, the Americans raised a large army to domineer and check the Baathists, which leaves the creaky democratic door wide open: Who is to lead? The answer is ostensibly the Shi'ites because they're the most populous. The pricklier question, "How are they to lead?" is fraught with more questions. Despite years of Sunni and Baathist rule, Americans have made much effort to appease and gain favor of the Shi'ites during the Iraqi reconstruction. In fact, much of America's post war success is linked to how receptive and helpful Shi'ite leaders are. Cut to the truth: Shi'ites desire power but are wary of American and Sunni power.
But Shi'ites and Sunnis in Iraq aren't diametrically opposite. One observer writes, "The divisions between them are primarily political rather than ethnic or cultural, and reflect the competition of the two groups over the right to rule and to define the meaning of nationalism in a country." Shi'ite and Sunni commonalities translate into many mixed marriages, "shared codes," and Iraqi nationalism. Given that there's some unity, Shi'ites can't shun the Sunnis because they can't afford it. Not including the Sunnis in the decision making process will close off oil revenues, and Baghdad could fall out of Shi'ite control. Splintering Iraq out of intolerance and revenge will undoubtedly harm Iraq's chance of building a meaningful democracy.
Sunnis can't be forgotten. So should Iraq install an affirmative action program to guarantee Sunni and other minority rights? There are many examples of international affirmative action; it isn't just a U.S. domestic issue. Affirmative action has existed in democracies and totalitarian states such as China, Nigeria, Malaysia, New Zealand, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and others. Most of these countries exhume the "Q" word. Pundit Thomas Lowell writes, "quotas are almost always discussed -- by critics and advocates alike -- in terms of their rationales, rather than their actual results." In Malaysia, for example, affirmative action programs have been created to "increase ethnic Malays' share of economic wealth," reports the Washington Times. These programs promise Malays spots in universities, corporations and other organizations. Meanwhile, others including Indians and Chinese, complain that they're being turned into second-class citizens. International affirmative action has precedent and problems.
Iraq is already planting such seeds. The new 25-member Iraq governing council is divided up proportionally among the Shi'ites, Kurds, Sunnis, Christians and Turkmen. Shi'ites have 13 members on the council, while Sunnis five. Isn't that a quota? The Coalition Provisional Authority maintains that the quota system is enough so that it won't become "entrenched." On the flipside, many Iraqis claim that the United States has "set a precedent for a virtual quota system, elevating ethnic and religious differences to a level that was never so prominent before," according to the Christian Science Monitor.
Without getting into the quota and affirmative action debate, and the legalities of it all, let's ask the question: "Where else can Iraq start?" Allotting membership for spots on the governing council based on population is a fine beginning, but the quota system must lose its American origin fast. In other words, the sooner Iraqis vote, the better. The less American say in the governing council, the more the ethnic distinctions on the governing council melt away, the better. Guaranteeing rights for Sunnis and other minorities through affirmative action has international precedent and could help Iraq, but it shouldn't be hard-coded into the eventual governing body.