Iraqi opposition wants U.S. in -- then out

Erratic U.S. policies make the exiles a little nervous.
christian science monitor
LONDON -- The Iraqi opposition leaders who gathered in London this weekend broadly agree on two things. Saddam Hussein must go. And the United States, should its forces topple the Iraqi president, must rapidly follow him out.
The United States is funding the Iraqi opposition, has worked to bring the fractious exiles together and may be the main engine of Saddam's downfall. But opposition leaders dread the prospect of a lingering U.S. presence in what they call a liberated Iraq.
"We don't want a break in sovereignty in Iraq to be filled by non-Iraqis," said Ahmed Chalabi, an Iraqi businessman who is president-in-waiting in the eyes of his supporters. "Even for a day."
U.S. officials, meanwhile, have spoken of the potential need for a sustained presence in the country -- perhaps even a military governor -- until a new Iraqi leadership can assume power.
Creating government
The London gathering of more than 300 delegates from a variety of parties and factions is the most significant meeting of Saddam's Iraqi opponents in a decade.
A final statement expected today will likely emphasize their desire to create a democratic, pluralistic, federal government -- the likes of which has never existed in the Middle East's Arab states.
But the delegates are also expected to name a high-level committee that will act as a liaison with the United States and may form the basis of a future government. One working paper at the conference refers to this group as a "nucleus transitional authority."
The United States has cautioned the delegates against creating any sort of provisional government or a government in exile, which the United States sees as premature.
Zalmay Khalilzad, President Bush's envoy to both the emerging Afghan government and to the Iraqi opposition, told delegates this weekend "to be prudent, don't overreach, and to be as representative as they can," according to a U.S. official here who spoke on condition of anonymity.
U.S. officials are said to fear that a government-in-waiting might complicate the scene should members of Saddam's military seize power before or during a U.S.-led military effort to overthrow the dictator.
This coup scenario -- while undemocratic -- seems tidier in the short term than the prospect of assembling a democratic leadership in a country that has known only authoritarian rulers or foreign-imposed monarchs in its 70 years as a modern state.
Leaders
Also, many of the opposition figures are notoriously unpopular in the country to which they aspire to return. Chalabi, a banker turned politician, has cultivated strong ties with the U.S. government, but his own people may not be as fond of him.
After a U.S. invasion, said Mousa al-Hussaini, an Iraqi exile in London who opposes American intervention and who stayed away from the weekend conference, Chalabi could rule for "maybe three or four days. ... He can't move in the cities of Iraq -- people will kill him with their hands."
The United States also wants to see which Iraqis from inside the country might emerge as potential leaders, something that a prepackaged provisional government might stifle.
Chalabi, for one, disparages this prospect. "Anyone who is active politically [against] Saddam is either in exile or dead," he asserted.
The conference, held in a central London hotel, brought together Iraqis of nearly every persuasion. Iraq's two main Kurdish leaders, Massoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani, attended, as did representatives of the country's majority Shiite community.
They included Iran-based clerics who want to create an Islamist state and secular, westernized Shiites who oppose such a government. Defectors from Saddam's military attended, as did Iraqis who have had nothing to do with his rule.
Views on removal
President Bush's seeming determination to remove Saddam from power has brought a giddy sense of possibility to the Iraqi exile community -- some 3 million people spread mainly across the Middle East, Europe and North America. But a history of erratic American policy toward Iraq also makes these exiles wary.
Beginning in the mid-1980s, the United States armed Saddam during Iraq's bloody conflict with Iran.
After the Gulf War, the United States encouraged Iraq's Shiites and Kurds to rise up against Saddam, and then failed to take steps to prevent his forces from killing thousands of rebels.
Ali Allawi, an investment-fund manager in London who was part of a brainstorming effort backed by the State Department, says he doesn't understand why President Bush seems to have a "thing" against Saddam. "I'm very pleased he does," Allawi added with a smile.
Not all the exiles at the conference favorably anticipated U.S. military action against their common enemy. Hamid al-Bayati, of the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq, which represents a portion of Iraq's majority Shiite community, said, "We don't believe America should invade Iraq or attack Iraq."
The better prospect, in Bayati's view, would be for the United States to enforce U.N. resolutions that enjoin Saddam from oppressing his people and thus pave the way for an Iraqi-led overthrow.