An Appeal for Muntadhar al-Zeidi

Muntadhar al-Zeidi is the Iraqi journalist who threw both of his shoes at George W. Bush in a gesture of disrespect at a joint press conference between Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki on Sunday. He has since been placed in the custody of the Iraqi military, and is now expected to go before the Central Criminal Court of Iraq, with a possible penalty of two years in prison for insulting a foreign leader and insulting the Iraqi state. The U.S., for its part, has left the entire legal process to the Iraqi government.

At issue are the consequences of morphing this incident from an outlier political statement to an issue of criminality, and therefore branding the statement itself, whether intentionally or not, as criminal. This case is already showing itself to be, in the eyes of many in the Middle East, far more of an indictment on the broad discontentment with the state of things in Iraq than it is legal recourse against a single disruptive outburst.

Mr. al-Zeidi has become something of a spokesman for an incredibly wide range of political positions. He is being held up by those who oppose any foreign influence in Iraq or the greater Arab world, by those who view President Bush as a violent and overarching imperialist, by those who seek to undermine the fledgling Iraqi government, and perhaps by many who are simply looking for explanations regarding the loss of their loved ones or livelihoods. To bring the gavel down on al-Zeidi with any degree of severity will be viewed in many circles as prosecution against every demographic taking some degree of satisfaction from al-Zeidi's actions and harboring doubts regarding the state's intentions.

The risk is further facilitating seemingly subversive behavior supported by seemingly subversive political movements, and giving the impression that anyone can defy the state at will without fear of being held criminally accountable. The reward is signaling to those who feel that al-Zeidi represents their interests better than the Iraqi government that their grievances are legitimate and that they have a place at the table. Perhaps nothing is more important in a nation's infancy than reassuring the people of their influence. Doing so strengthens the sociopolitical mainstream and chips away at the appeal of fringe ideologies by minimizing disenfranchisement. Iraqis who feel secure in their government's sincerity and restraint have less reason to turn to violent or discriminatory opposition groups and more reason to participate in building a viable state that confronts serious cultural, economic, sectarian, etc. issues through legislation and diplomacy.

This event is a litmus test for Iraq's inclusiveness in a fiercely divisive region. It is an indicator of the Iraqi government's legitimacy as a representative democracy and as a responsible practitioner of its own constitutional limits. The relatively dubious Iraqi court system is now at center stage, with a high-profile opportunity to strike a balance affirming both the need to respect the international community and also to preserve free expression. Whatever the decision, it needs to be made with al-Zeidi as an active participant. It must not foster the notion that he is a political prisoner who has been silenced, victimized, and destined to exist as a tool for those seeking to derail the already slender hopes for peace and progress. To make an example of al-Zeidi as a criminal is to potentially alienate millions in order to atone for an insult. In contrast, to make an example of his actions as a manifestation of free speech in the context of a young nation trying to come together offers at least the hope of continued open discussion and reconciliation.

Perhaps al-Zeidi's situation will not serve as a jumping-off point for a greater Iraqi free speech movement, and perhaps it won't reassure Iraqis that their government views their qualms with how the region has changed in the last six years as valid. If nothing else, the responsible treatment of al-Zeidi by the Iraqi courts may keep these events from becoming another ideological weapon in the arsenal of the region's militants.

Iraq has to choose whether or not it wants facilitate a stable sociopolitical climate by locking up challengers. This is a chance for Iraq to declare itself a nation that is receptive to and respectful of political diversity and dissent.