Should the Bush administration cooperate with the U.N. in a comeback to Iraq?
I've been anti-U.N. for a long time, but being the practical sort... in this case, I'd say yes.
Why? The reason is Ayatollah Sistani (search), who controls the Shiite vote — 60 percent of the population.
If Sistani inisits on elections now, the Shiites (search) win and they run things, and that splits Iraq into three.
We don't want that. We want it to remain together, and to do that the three groups in Iraq must learn to get along.
So if the Shiites say they will go along with a delay to establish a constitutional balance of the three groups, it's a win.
If the only way the Shiites will do that is for the U.N. to come in to help, then it is in America's interest for that to happen.
This is where it gets tricky. Lots of people in the U.N. want to see the U.S. fail, and helping at this point is against their interest.
So we look to Kofi Annan (search). Will he have the guts to step up to do the right thing — help the U.S. convince Sistani to wait for a constitution? Or will he follow his U.N. membership and let things go straight to hell in Iraq?
Kofi... it's time to decide. Are you on the side of the Iraqis or the anti-Americans?
That's My Word.
What do you think? We'd like to hear from you, so send us your comments at firstname.lastname@example.org. Some of your e-mails will be featured on the air or on our site.
• Looking for previous My Word columns?