Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld today discussed the prospects for "the free and fair elections which the Iraqi people
so richly deserve, and which the Administration so deeply condones, as long as it’s after the U.S. elections." Although
admitting that it was possible that some Iraqi provinces, estimating "perhaps one out of five persons," could not be
ready for elections by the January, 2005, target date, he quoted Interim Prime Minister Allawi that "fifteen out of eighteen
provinces are peaceable", and could very likely have peaceable elections, that is if the insurgents allow it.
"It may very well be that not all provinces can participate in elections," he said, saying that perhaps twenty percent
might be disenfranchised. He asked himself, since nobody else would, because everybody knows he asks himself questions he
is prepared to answer, "Is that better than no election? You bet it is." A reporter asked, however, whether an 80% election
isn’t in fact, "no election?"
He said, "you have to remember that an election in which not all persons can participate meaningfully is not without precedent.
We tested the idea, actually, in another election, held over three years ago in, um, er, in a different country."
Estimates from the CIA have indicated recently that the areas in which free and fair elections could be held, in view of
the scant 25% of UN officials who have actually come into the country, is much less than the 80% or less implied by Secretary
Rumsfeld. Actually, in view of the fact that Americans who venture from their housing without an accompanying formation of
infantry and APC’s have become quite rare in the past two months, the actual area accessible to those few