Iraq's fledgling government seems to be perpetually on the edge of collapse. The only stabilizing force in the nation, the US presence, polarizes the population--even as civil war has un-officially broken out between the Shiites and the Suuni's, the Kurds taking a back seat (but not very far back) to the main conflict. And in a bid to secure some limited peace, a plan has been presented by the Shiite led government that presents the option of giving full pardons to those who have killed US troops.
The possibility of pardons for some Iraqi insurgents comes at a time when the Iraqi government is struggling to establish a police force and to quell the almost daily attacks that are carried out against not only US troops but also against Iraqi civilians. The reasoning is that many Iraqi youth believe that their 'acts of terror' are 'acts of resistance and patriotism' and that as such they do not mean to kill--only to defend.
Should amnesty be offered by the Iraqi government to these individuals it will leave the United States in an odd position. Since 2003 when we invaded Iraq (for better or for worse) Iraq stablility has been one of our main goals in the international realm, it has cost the lives of over 2,000 American soldiers. Now we, having instilled a foriegn government will find ourselve forced to accept the decisions of that government even if it means accepting that no Iraqi's will be held accountable for the deaths of our American men and service women. This also brings up a second question, are the Iraqi's responsible for those deaths, or is the administration?
And if we believe that Iraqi's should be held responsible for the deaths of US soldiers, should US soldiers be held responsible for the deaths of Iraqi's?
Thoughts anyone?
Wow, this was posted a long time ago but I just came across it. No, Iraqi civilians who assassinate US soldiers are engaging in self-defense thus they should not be held legally liable (or yes, amnesty should be granted to them).