Humans can learn skills. Communication, conflict resolution, problem-solving, mediation, group facilitation and negotiation are skills that are taught and can be learned. For each of these skills there are distinguishing characteristics of newbies and experts. So far, the evidence says that all the major players in the Bush II administration are newbies–their toolbox consists primarily of chest thumping, righteous insistence on their version of events, intimidation, threats, secret dirty tricks, choosing cronies over competence, and choosing force over issue-based negotiation.

We will not get a political solution in Iraq when we insist on controlling the process with our military, and when we offer no expertise, no modeling of skilled behavior, no guidance in a collaborative democratic process. Our Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) modeled authoritarian decision-making, cronyism and corruption over competence. Our current administration chooses and models winner-takes-all, rule by force, rule by an elitist minority, and rule that ignores stakeholders with differences of opinion. We have modeled democracy at a barely newbie level.

It is a bit unfair and foolish to now castigate the Iraqis for following in the ruts that we carved. Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld described the looting of ammunition depots, government offices, universities, museums and hospitals as the “untidiness of democracy,” and his bosses described him as “the best Secretary of Defense” in U.S. history. With this vision of emerging democracy, of course, we have a huge mess in Iraq. It has been apparent since 2000 that the GOP values celebrity over substance, ideological talking points over doing homework on issues, loyalty to people and specific paths over loyalty to principles and value-based outcomes, and a determination to win a position whatever the cost (breaking the law, harming other people is OK if it serves your purpose). President George W. Bush could be a poster boy for crony-based, minimally competent, elitist, trickle-down benefits government. Sadly for our nation, he will never make it onto a poster about great democratic practice.

If we keep doing more of the same, only harder and ‘better,’ we will keep getting more of the same results only more intense. This has been the case since choosing to invade and occupy over choosing issue-based problem solving and conflict resolution. Escalating violence is predictable.

OK, so, how do we get everyone out of these ruts?

A clear mission and goals set by Iraqis. Here are the current goals as defined by this administration: a country with stable government, able to maintain security for its citizens and secure borders that is not a haven for fundamentalist terrorists. (Please note, that is roughly what we had before our invasion and occupation.) We are no longer aiming short term for much semblance of a functioning democracy.

Further stated goals include: an agreement to equitably share oil amongst all the stakeholders in Iraq; an agreement on how to reintegrate the Baath Party (after our CPA Director, Paul Bremer, foolishly banned them from any positions in any government agencies, sending them by necessity into a radical opposition to our occupation); achieving agreement on disbanding the militias; and holding local elections.

What about the goals for reconstruction? Where are the goals and timelines for infrastructure–equipped, staffed and functioning government ministries, roads, electricity, water, health care, education? Helping the Iraqis to set goals and timetables for reconstruction would give the Iraqis hope and purpose. With attention on reconstruction goals, and measures of success, America could set goals and timetables for our financial support of the strategies that Iraqis devise to achieve reconstruction success. These goals, timetables and measure of success could build Iraqi citizen’s engagement, sense of empowerment and goodwill.

There is a great deal of conflict around all of these issues–high levels of investment in particular outcomes, egos tied to specific outcomes, and old and new scores to settle before people can move on constructively. Any movement forward requires a very high skill level in communication, mediation, conflict resolution, facilitation and negotiation.

Use professionals. So where are our professionals? Where are our experts in intercultural communication, conflict resolution and problem solving, mediation, facilitation and negotiation?

Hey Congress, how about requiring that we gather and pay every Arabic, Turkish and Farsi speaking, professionally trained and experienced communicator/mediator/conflict resolution facilitator on the planet to go see what they can do. We have 140,000 military and we pay another 120,000 people to support these military. How many people, with training and expertise in these communication and decision-making/ problem-solving skills are we paying to help resolve these conflicts with all stakeholders present?