Iraqi unity is an uphill battle

Re “Iraq’s struggle for unity,” editorial, April 4

The fact that The Times’ editorial and I agree that “it’s in everyone’s interest for Shiite unity to give way to Iraqi unity” is not sufficient to make it happen or produce an abatement of the violence between a bloc of Sunnis (let’s call them “the insurgents”) and a bloc of Shiites (let’s call them “the Sadr militia”). It is not a slam-dunk that a unity government can control these groups and stop them from killing Iraqis and American troops. Does President Bush have a fall-back position if a unity or non-unity Iraqi government emerges but cannot stop the violence? Or are we expected to follow Bush’s strategy of crossing that bridge when we are pushed over it.

MARCUS JACOBSON

Los Angeles

*

You write that “Shiite unity in Iraq has to be sacrificed for the sake of national unity.” Easier said than done. The current administration lost the popular vote in 2000 and won by 1% in 2004, yet nothing has compelled the party in power, the GOP, to sacrifice party unity for the greater, bipartisan good. And this is in the land that is the shining city on the hill. To suggest that a long-suppressed group sacrifice for the national good is much easier advice to give than to take. When the United States cannot offer itself as a successful example of this process, how can we expect any better from Iraq, a country that has never known democracy?

MATT HOLLOWAY

Los Angeles