Who "won" in Iraq's elections?

"Today, the people of Iraq have spoken to the world, and the world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East," asserted President Bush in a January 30 speech. Pundits from across the partisan divide were eager to describe the first Iraqi elections held under U.S. military occupation as a significant milestone in the "global march of freedom."

The president, predictably, was eager to seize upon the election as a validation of his decision to invade Iraq. However, as Time magazine correctly noted, the "real author" of the election was Iranian-born Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who had issued a fatwa (religious order) commanding Iraq's Shi'ite Muslims to flock to the polls on behalf of Shi'ite-approved candidates. "The U.S. had never intended for Iraqis to democratically choose the body that would write their new constitution," continued Time. "Washington had envisaged an election only after a constitution had been written by a body appointed by, and under the tutelage of the U.S."

The original plan had been to hand Iraq over to a government composed of Iraqi exiles hand-picked by Washington and led by fugitive Ahmed Chalabi (who, as it turns out, may have been an Iranian agent). Plan "B" was to have a U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council compose a new constitution. When that approach proved a non-starter, Washington proposed holding a series of caucuses around the country to select a constitution-making body from another handpicked group.

"Sistani was having none of it," recounts Time. "He insisted on having democratic elections, used his influence among Shi'ites on the Governing Council to block [the caucus] scheme, and then brought his supporters onto the streets to warn that anything short of democracy would be deemed illegitimate by the Shi'ite majority."

It should be pointed out that Sistani, a soul-mate of the autocratic Ayatollahs who rule Iran, has no interest in freedom as it is understood in the United States. His eager embrace of democracy reflects his desire to acquire the power necessary to create an Iranian-style despotism in what had been a nonsectarian country prior to the U.S. invasion.

Thus it's entirely reasonable to believe that nearly 1,500 U.S. servicemen have died, and more than 10,000 have been wounded, in order to bring to power an Iraqi government built on the same revolutionary brand of Islam that prevails in neighboring Iran.