 |
A few things about leading complex change are
predictable. The main one is that unpredictable things will
happen.
When they do, a leader of change will do one of two things:
Get knocked off his or her plan and let the change initiative
falter; or find a way to “reframe” the unpredictable
event so it helps to reach the change objective.
Take the drive to institute the rule of
law in Iraq, leading to a self-sustaining democracy. The horrible
situations at the Abu Ghraib prison hurt the US-led coalition’s
effort to bring positive change to Iraq – no question
about that.
And we quickly see those who oppose the push for democracy,
or who wish to see the US and her allies falter, using Abu Ghraib
as an excuse for resistance.
But an opportunity exists. How so? The Abu Ghraib abuses can
be reframed to prove the value of democratic processes of law
and government openness. By observing how the malfeasance is
addressed, the world can see the contrast between the values
of the United States versus what was standard procedure under
Iraq’s former rulers.
For years the world has heard stories of the horrible torture
and death at Abu Ghraib by Saddam Hussein’s operatives.
Have any of those cases been tried on the Iraqi equivalent of
Court TV or made public to the citizenry of the Arab world?
Have the mass graves been shown to the world?
Yet that’s precisely what should happen if Muslims, Iraqi,
Arab and even the western worlds are to understand Abu Ghraib
in its proper context: There is no value in trying to hide the
truth or excuse making, and great value is in showing how a
free and open society confronts human failings.
The US government should conduct all trials of those accused
of perpetrating evils at Abu Ghraib in public, on Court TV for
the US audience, and via every available outlet for the Arab,
Muslim and Iraqi audiences.
And if those trials lead to the indictment of higher US military
or governmental officials or employees, then they should be
brought to public trial.
But the reframing effort should not stop with Abu Ghraib. At
the same time, the trial of Saddam Hussein should begin. Let
the Iraqi public and the Islamic extremists see the two trials
proceeding side by side. Everyone should see evidence of the
evils Saddam is accused of perpetrating, right alongside the
embarrassing treatment of some prisoners by some US agents.
To create the greatest enlightenment worldwide, the investigation
of the United Nations’ Oil for Food program, and ultimately
the trials of the wrongdoers at the UN, should be conducted
in just as public a manner and as close to the same timeline
as possible.
As an institution that more or less makes its own rules of governance,
the United Nations is not evil, any more so than is the Iraqi
public or the United State citizenry. Wrongdoers exist within
all societies and organizations; the ultimate question is how
is that wrongdoing resolved. All three investigations and trials
can show that – and together they’ll also prove
the distinctions in the values of open and democratic systems
in contrast to dictatorships.
Granted, some very unsavory things will be shown to at least
a billion people. At the same time, a process of law and transparency
will be demonstrated. And the people of Iraq will see that --
while there may have been unscrupulous players at the UN cooperating
with Hussein to steal oil revenues -- the majority of UN staff
and leaders are honorable and just as disgusted by that corruption,
just as the majority of US citizens are disgusted by the actions
of some of their fellow citizens at Abu Ghraib.
Back to our opening theme, which goes beyond even the disconcerting
global situation today. Change is always very complicated to
lead, and the natural resistance to change will be reinforced
by unpredictable events when those events appear to undermine
the motives of the change proponent. But competent leaders will
reframe that unpredictable event to make it support the essence
of their motivations for the change.
Jerome F. Climer
17 May 2004
|
