Dexter Filkins’ report in The New York Times about Iyad Alawi, seems much better to me than the one in today’s Post. From what little I know, this seems to me to be a good turn of events for three reasons: First, and most important, this guy is a politician--and a resonable one--with some base. And, he knows how to get others to support him. Note that two Shiite parties, each wanted a different person, and neither would compromise; yet both were willing to go with Alawi. And Sistani approves. Second, this puts an end to the UN’s Brahimi’s attempt to pick a non-politician, a so called technocrat, to be PM. That would have been a bad move. Third, The Iraqis themselves seemed to have pushed Alawi. This means that he seems to not have been imposed by either the Coalition or the UN. The fact that UN was surprised amuses me. They underestimated the Iraqis ability to do politics. They are going to need that ability in the coming years.

As I have noted before, I continue to be impressed by how unthoughtful and/or prejudiced the US elite media is toward developments in Iraq. Even this NYT story is entitled, "Exile with ties to the CIA is named premier of Iraq." CNN and the others have been reporting it the same way. The prejudice is against exiles, and most certainly against anyone with American ties. The Iraqis seem to have no such prejudice. By the way, neither did Poles, Hungarians, Estonians, et al, after the fall of Communism. Their cabinets were stuffed with exiles. Good for them. I am betting that our media will continue to be confused and prejudiced. They can’t report this story as good news. In my naivete, I continue to be amazed. But the news is good, and we should delight in it.