For future reference..Regime Change 101

Just in case our government feels the need to "go changin' regimes" in more poor countries, there are some things they need to remember.

1. the general population of these countries is not always eager for the possible strife that accompanies regime change.

2. most of the poor countries that "need regime change" have "strongmen" in power who are not all that beloved, but they have usually instituted strict rules that most people already understand, and have more or less accepted.

3. even in the poorest of countries, there IS an order, of sorts. The rank and file citizen KNOWS what he/she must do to remain "under the radar", and most live pretty normal lives if they stay clear of controversy.

4. unemployed young men are always the prime combatants we will face (as are some of OUR own forces). economics DRIVES unrest.

5. even people who desperately long for a change of governance, will band together if a foreign "intruder" starts killing people in their country.

6. shovels, concrete, plywood , food & MONEY are the best regime changers around. if people are fed, and housed and provided with WORK and materials to improve their own countries, they will most likely look at the "regime changers" as friends, not foes.

7. the country being "regime-changed" probably does not want to be a "mini-America" or a "pseudo-America". they already have their own customs & religions.

8. it's always a good idea to do advance work to understand what will make their lives better..not just different. People on the ground KNOW what they need...all they need is help getting there.

9. it's helpful to have enough of the "regime-changers" who speak the language fluently

10. "regime-changers" must resist the temptation of setting up permanency (or the appearance of permanency). Most people do not want "new guy-same as the old guy" diplomacy. Change for the sake of change is not a positive outcome.

Iraq should be teaching us a valuable lesson, but I fear it is not.

Had we posted placards all over the towns and cities, offering JOBS and free materials to the workers, the men of the country would have been too busy working, to sit around thinking up ways to kill us. Boatloads of food and building materials would have saved so many lives and so much money. I think we could have paid every man between 15-50 about $1000.00 US a month and who knows where they would be today? Probably sitting around in air conditioned homes , watching the kiddies play with their IPods and X-boxes.

The "insurgents" would have had a difficult time recruiting men & boys who were making lots of money, and rebuilding their own country, one sheet of plywood at a time.

the prickly issue of women's rights might have sorted itself out too, without the intervention of the hyper-religious fundamentalists rising influence. Iraqis lived a pretty secular life before we "changed their regime", and women were a part of government and academia.

If we had not bungled the whole thing so badly, women might have emerged with an even higher profile. If a family with two teenaged boys and a dad..maybe an uncle or two, all of a sudden had a monthly income of $3-4K, the men would be pretty busy doing their own thing, and the women would have been free to continue their own activities without being under the thumb of angry, stay-at-home men.

can be summed up by saying: The problem with power is that it attracts the very sort of people who should not be given any.