Bob: Right, the mission is defined by conditions which cannot produce success without changes to the underlying constitution.
Governance, for most folks and most circumstances, is not a national affair, but a local delivery/control/representation structure. Sub-national governance is the most complex, intricate and ever-evolving "war by another means" as states, counties, municipalities continuously "manage" inherent conflicts within a web of competitive budgets, interlocking governmental "authorities," all aimed at delivering a service down to users.
Nice to believe that "big gov" is the "big deal," but, under most circumstances, it is the tail trying to wag the dog. US democracy is delivered by a city or county maintenance truck, fireman, or processing clerk--all based on inherently unique systems of evolved local processes, authorities, and inter-relationships.
When "big gov," ala Iraq and Afghanistan, fools around with restructuring a country without any actual clue as to sub-governance, how sub-governance is and has to be arranged to function, and the way things work, you have these inevitable problems.
Iraq's constitution, TAL and present, are amazing documents for a sub-governance person. It is all about stock markets and crap related to US big gov issues. Once dissembling the national authority, it merely directs, as to local laws, that things will be as they were.
Nobody in charge actually knew what that meant even five years later, and the disconnects and confusions are still playing out.
In 2008, UN constitutional law folks went through many of the "enactments" which Sadaam would routinely send down to his "representative" bodies for ratification. One paper in a confused and ill-considered constitution, every one would be applicable.
What should have occurred, after removing a brutal dictator, was a "role back" of every category of abuse to pre-dictator status. But nobody on our side knew what that would be either. Oh, the problems that arise when our starship lands on alien planets.
Back to Afghanistan, once again, we created a nation, but it is not one that works, or that could work in that country. All because of the sub-governance structural and administrative sphere (local governance).
As Bob points out, those are the rules. Unless something changes, we are lost in a dysfunctional system which we are constantly trying to subvert.
One thing we do know: The problems are not addressed in the current system, raising the questions: Are the system defects actually a substantial basis for legitimate opposition/conflict? Will the defects, if unaddressed, preclude stability, end of conflict, regardless of any interim efforts?
Bookmarks