SHARQ: New developments were taking place on the domestic political scene months before the June presidential election. Political parties, societies, and powerful Iranian lobbies were eying the presidential palace. Some reformists were trying to forge a coalition with top presidential candidate and former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani. They were focused on the notion of moderation. Another pro-reformer bloc headed by former minister of higher education, Mostafa Moin, was expecting to garner a larger share of the votes. The then candidate Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was speaking at length about upholding and promoting social and economic justice. However, the people were divided into two totally different groups. First were those who did not vote in the ninth presidential election. Second included groups who cast ballots in the belief that voting is always better than staying away. All presidential hopefuls made many promises to people. However, as is evident from past governments, none of the pledges have materialized fully. Ahmadinejad too made a lot of promises, including fighting corruption and giving people their fair share of oil revenues. He also promised to deliver in the area of jobs and affordable housing. But the only things that have taken place so far are changes in senior managerial posts.

Membership Question
HAMSHAHRI: Is Israel a legal member of the United Nations? This is a question that different nations usually ask because Israel is a usurper regime and was not established under normal conditions. Israelis who enjoyed strong from the British colonialists forced the Palestinians out of their homes and territories. The United Nations set two preconditions for Israel’s membership in the UN. First, it should establish the state of Israel in only one half of the occupied territories. This is while right from the beginning of establishment of the usurper state the Israelis captured about 78 percent of the occupied territories. Second, Israel promised to allow all Palestinian refugees who were driven out of their homeland to return if they desired so. Israel has made a mockery of the UN and arrogantly continues to violate almost all norms of human and international behavior. So, how can it be allowed to be a member of the world body?

Give us three minutes and we can find an op-ed piece in a US newspaper calling for the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, or arguing that they should stay. The arguments are varied and numerous: If the US leaves, anarchy will ensue. Occupation forces are a target for foreign terrorists. Bush should set a timetable for withdrawal. Setting a timetable would embolden those using violence in Iraq. And so on. What is missing from this picture? Any discussion of what the Iraqi people themselves want.
The opinions of those most affected by this war count the most. And so a nationwide referendum should be conducted in Iraq on the question of whether US troops should stay or go, in which every Iraqi can vote directly on this question.
What the US public wants is much discussed in the media--nearly every week poll results are announced indicating how many people believe the United States should withdraw all or some troops from Iraq (63 percent, according to the latest USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll) and how many believe the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq (59 percent, from the same poll).
As US citizens we certainly have an interest in whether the troops stay. Our tax money funds the US military presence, and our young men and women are being killed and injured there. So our opinions matter.
But what about the Iraqis? There are inherent difficulties in polling in an unstable, war-torn environment. Furthermore, most polls of Iraqi public opinion ask such ambiguous questions as, “Do you think the country is headed in the right direction?“--to which a “yes“ answer could mean any number of things, from a belief that the insurgents are defeating the occupation forces and that’s a good thing, to a belief that a democratic government will be established soon in part due to the US presence. Neither is it sufficient to simply allow the Iraqi government to determine whether or not US troops stay: 37 percent of Iraqis, a significant minority, feel that the Iraqi National Assembly does not serve the interests of all Iraqis (International Republican Institute poll, July 2005).
Some polls have asked Iraqis specifically about the presence of US troops, and guess what: they want us to leave. A February poll by the US military, cited by the Brookings Institution, found that 71 percent of Iraqis “oppose the presence of Coalition Forces in Iraq“. This poll was taken only in urban areas, but others have found much the same sentiment.
According to a January 2005 poll by Abu Dhabi TV/Zogby International, 82 percent of Sunni Arabs and 69 percent of Shiite Arabs favor the withdrawal of US troops either immediately or after an elected government is in place. But an opinion poll does not carry the weight of a referendum, in which all Iraqis could clearly and definitively vote on whether or not US troops should remain in their country. This can be done: Kurdish activists organized a referendum on independence during the January national elections in Iraq, which found that over 90 percent of Kurd voters want independence for the region.
It appears that we as a nation are so self-absorbed that both the hawks and the doves among us have forgotten to ask what those most affected by the war--the Iraqi people themselves--want.
Let us remedy this situation by supporting a referendum and then abiding by the results. Let the Iraqi people decide.
Abigail A. Fuller
Associate professor of sociology
Manchester College, USA