I am not going to write a tirade against American foreign policy, or oppositely, a glowing review about it. Instead, I will focus purely objectively on the process of reaching peace in Iraq, and I will make reference to political theory in order to explain myself.
Under Saddam Hussein's authoritative rule, Iraq was a single, stable state. That is one truth that cannot be denied, regardless of Saddam's repression and atrocities against the ethnic segments of the country's population. In a more historical perspective, Shiite, Kurd and the Sunni segments have been against one another, and that historical hate does not disappear with one invasion by the so-called "liberators".
The desire to establish a democracy in such a state as Iraq is good in theory. Fair representation, freedom of speech, as far as the state is willing to tolerate it and a rule by the majority, are all elements of a democratic society. However, in a country where the population has a seethed centuries-old dislike for another ethnic group, and where the new generation is raised with that idea, no stable democratic change can be expected to come within a reasonable time frame. What needs to develop, is a culture of tolerance towards those who are different, a regard for human and women's rights, and willingness towards patience and debate. All of these requirements are absent from Iraqi society, as it currently exists.
In the short run, the most acceptable solution to achieving peace in Iraq, and I foresee this happening sooner than later, is the dissolution of the state into three separate countries Kurd, Shiite, and Sunni. The north, middle, and south of the country belong predominantly to each of the aforementioned ethnic groups, and division between those lines is a good way to severely stem and eliminate the violence that currently plagues Iraq.
Independence provides a stability, from which the fostering of the democratic process can begin. Cultural events, trade, cooperation on the international level, a teaching of tolerance and respect all of these can begin to bring the people of the former country of Iraq as a whole. Ideally, a microcosm of the European Union can emerge in time, with the three countries sharing a similar democratic political culture, economic policy, and systems of government. That, however, is a picture that has the opportunity of becoming reality after many decades, if not centuries. Only then can reunification within a single state be considered, but it will not certainly occur in the lifetime of my generation, not the next; perhaps the one after that will live to see it happen.
Now, let's look at political theory. It is a fact that people begin to demand more political freedom when they acquire more economic freedom. Not concerned as much with day-to-day survival, people begin to pay more attention and devote time to the system that actually governs their livelihoods, and start making demands to improve it.
Right now, Iraq is subjected to high unemployment, destroyed infrastructure, low wages, and in general, people lead miserable livelihoods. In the aftermath of the conclusion of conflict, and the new independence of the three states, the system of choice should be a socialist one, akin to the one that governed the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe in the twentieth century. Improving the lives of the country's population should be the first step to achieving democracy. With the inflow of capital, private business and investment, the political structure must become more liberated, so to allow stability and prosperity. As for the historical hate between the ethnicities, it will not lessen for centuries more, but the concept of tolerance can be introduced and promoted, because only cooperation can guarantee the successful existence of peace and prosperity in today's Iraq.