The transfer of sovereignty in Iraq has gotten massive headlines, but most of those headlines have got it wrong.

There was no transfer of power. What was transfered was what is hoped will develop into authority. This is not the same thing as "power." The US never had power over Iraq to hand over. What we had was a control of authority--something quite different.

Power is always in the people. The Roman dictum, "Potestas est Populi" is the operative description. Authority is legitimatized by the power of the people in the best of cases, and in the worst authority uses force and violence to suppress power.

So, power was not transferred. Hopefully authority was and the American wish and intent that the authority will have the supoprt of the people and respresent their power.

The concept of power is well understood by anyone who has ever been in, or worked in a prison. A short stay in one of these institutions reveals that the inmates have the power in the equation. The guards have a supposed monopoly on the use of violence and force in order to exert the authority of the prison administration. Yet these guards realize they have to maintain strict proceedures to prevent a unification of the power of the prisoners. The prisoners far outnumber the correctional officers in any prison and it is by keeping a strict discipline and having the potential to bring in implements of violence they can keep the power of the prisoners at bay.

The Power in Iraq is diffused amongst religious groups, tribes, ethnic divides, and socio-economic considerations. Can this annointed leadership take the ball and score? History will be the referee.

Publius