With the government of Saddam Hussain destroyed, the question arises: “Who will govern Iraq?”.
It is also clear what happens when a government is removed — a break down of law and order. The looting in Basra and Baghdad is clear evidence of that.
Some say, “Let the Iraqi people govern Iraq!”. But there is no country in the world that is governed by its people as a whole. All countries are governed by governments, that is, by comparatively small groups of people, usually headed by a single person. And, as is clearly seen from the present situation in Iraq, without government people slip into anarchy.
So what is government for?
As we see clearly from the example of Iraq, once a government cannot provide these basic functions, chaos ensues and “humanitarian disasters” follow.
Such collapse of the basic government functionality often happens as a result of wars and revolutions. And once such situation arises, some government appears on the scene, because any government, which provides such basic functionality is better than no government at all.
But once a government appears on the scene, those in government seek to use their powers, not for the purpose of the duties of government, but for self‐aggrandizement and favoritism — government becomes “political”. And once government becomes political, those who find themselves disfavored by such government begin to oppose it, and the “struggle for power” begins.
But President Bush says that he wants Iraq to be governed by laws. This is a good intention. But, who will lay down these laws, and on the basis of what?
The future will tell.
But what happens to the world government?
The Iraq war has clearly shown to the world, that this world government is President Bush himself, and that he rules the world as he wills.
This is better than no government at all, but then President Bush assumes full responsibility for the fate of the world.
Is he going to rule the world by rule of law, or by politics?
And, if it is rule of law, then by what laws will he rule the world?