Those who have been watching the war on television are familiar with the video footage after the US military took control of Safwan, the southern Iraqi border town, when a man was captured on film hitting a large, partially destroyed wall portrait of Saddam Hussein with his shoe. It was the first glimpses the world has viewed of joyous Iraqis dancing in the street before their American liberators. Assurances of American and British war advocates who maintained that this military action is indeed liberation and not conquest, that Iraqis would welcome such intervention and that the invasion and occupation would place Iraq on the road to democracy. If the terrorizing of American troops does not stop happening soon, war planners can expect to have a tougher time securing Iraq and creating the environment necessary for reconstruction and democratization.

Consider the celebratory heel banging in Safwan. A few days after the world heard about the shoe being smacked against Hussein's forehead, ABC News reporter John Donvan and his crew crossed the border from Kuwait into Iraq and visited the town. They witnessed no rejoicing. Townspeople surrounded the journalists and passionately voiced the

By supplying security and aid expeditiously and effectively, US forces can take a stab at conquering the resentment and distrust. As Donvan found out in Safwan, residents there were already complaining about the absence of assistance. The administration had a good initial excuse, the opposition in Basra and the South was tougher than expected, and humanitarian supplies could not be moved into Iraq, but there should have been a plan for such a scenario. Aid started flowing once British and US forces secured portions of the South.

To address the likely distrust, which might not be surmountable, the occupiers must take rapid steps toward establishing a new political order. In cities and towns across the country, US officials, presumably military people will have to identify locals like tribal elders, prominent citizens and bureaucrats with whom to work toward developing some form of representative governance. Among these groups of people there are people who resent the US, which will fight back with groups of militias. The democracy builders of the US occupation will have to understand and take into account the rivalries and conflicts among the groups.

The credibility gap that must be overcome is pronounced, says Kipper. "It is very unlikely any American transition plan will be accepted," she maintains. Noting that Iraq has been an independent country since 1921, Kipper observes, "They're losing their sovereignty. That's not something a very proud, fierce, nationalist people will accept very easily." And, she adds, "we are culturally and linguistically deprived" in matters related to the Middle East. "We will have to wait until [the war] is over and see how sensitive we can be," she says. "This is a war of choice an American-led war against a Muslim-led country and that has consequences. Iraqis will be happy Saddam Hussein is gone. But they will not be happy to be occupied."

Some topics in this essay:
Saddam Hussein, Bush Liberator, American British, Kuwait Iraq, Operation Democracy, Basra South, Iraqi Freedom, Noting Iraq, Post-War Iraq, Council Bush, iraqi people, saddam hussein, security aid, american troops, middle east,