[superleeds]

If Iraq is to work as a democratic society, it must be built on solid foundations and surely economic freedom is one of these. If an Iraqi government assumes power but has no immediate control over the countries purse strings - because it will either have to honor or break longterm commitments made during its formation - how are the people respect it, and how are they not to imagine corruption and nepotism amongst the various functions.

I agree ultimately of course any country following a democratic path will by default be capitalist and therefore many institutions will be run (and I agree many should, altho a few should not IMO) by the private sector. But this is the point I am making, in virtually all of their construction, financial and utilitie markets, (and many of these are closed or monopolistic markets,) this decision has been made for them. Resentment will ride high amongst any who feel that they are being treated unfairly - and many will, if only because its human nature - and they will have a deaf ear to talk too because their brave new world has it's hands tied. Where are they look for satisfaction in a country still overrun with insurgents, tribal leaders and the such.

Let me put it this way. This adminsistration tried to push thru a revised social security bill which would put more onus on the private sector, the American people thru various means have let it be known that they are, not ready/dislike/don't think its broke/whatever, and so the administration has backed off. It is highly doubtful Bush will get anywhere near what he wanted. Thats democracy at work. It's going to be a fait accompli as far as the new Iraq is concerned and any changes requested by the people will be controlled more by a few CEO's around the world than it's own elected government.