Wrote this awhile back. What has changed?
10/30/2007
Those who ignore history are bound to repeat it. Our leadership told us from the beginning how easy it would be to invade Iraq, turn it into a bright shining beacon of democracy for all those in the middle east and how it would all be paid for with a sea of Iraqi oil. It seems they did not look at their history books. War is always unpredictable and a high risk proposition. In the American Civil War, both sides thought it would be over after a few quick and relatively painless battles. Instead it took four years and over 600,000 dead. World War I was similar. Many thought it would be over quickly. By the time it was over 20 million were dead and the maps had been completely redrawn. France thought the next war would be a defensive struggle and built the Maginot Line. The Germans had other ideas. They used a highly developed mechanized offense called Blitzkrieg and bypassed it rolling up the French in six weeks. Who in 1964 could have foreseen the fall of our embassy Saigon (now called Ho Chi Min City) in 1975 complete with images of rooftop evacuations? The Gulf War in 1991 did go according to plan but few could have seen the post war troubles in Iraq. Our leadership failed to read their history books and took us in to the worst type of war, a war of choice. There has been volumes already written debunking the reasons they gave to invade Saddam’s Iraq. The real reasons fit nicely into the new colonization paradigm, Globalization.
Over the last 500 or so years the west has expanded into every region of the world forever changing indigenous cultures. In many cases the indigenous culture lost it’s way of life and sometimes were wiped out all together. The west tried to dominate those it came in contact with. They made those it came in contact with feel inferior, dependent and hate themselves. Colonization proved to be a good way to take advantage of natural resources, cheap labor and give western nations a sense of superiority above others. They built up stereo types of the colonized that portrayed them as lazy, dumb, ignorant and incapable of self rule. This is not some relic of the past. It is alive and well today. We now call this globalization. Instead of countries moving into poor regions; it is now large multi-national corporations taking advantage of those most unable to protect them selves. This is done with the blessing of many western nations and in some cases with the use of their militaries. The US invasion of Iraq is a prime example of globalization at it’s worse.
There is a no more clear example of subjugation and exploitation of a people than in Iraq today. As with colonization efforts of the past, we were given dubious reasons for interfering in the first place. The real reason has to be oil. It is the most important resource in the world and the industry that turns it into usable energy is the most politically powerful. Without such a valuable resource Saddam Hussein would still be in power. His army, weakened by years of war with Iran, US and economic sanctions was no match for the most powerful military machine in the world. Many thought we did a good thing by ridding Iraq and the world of Saddam and his infamous sons, Uday and Qusay. With no plan to keep the lights on, police the streets or take out the trash Baghdad quickly descended into chaos. However, we did secure the Oil Ministry. Almost overnight we went from liberators to occupiers. We quickly took on the role of colonizers deciding we knew what was best for Iraq. First we disbanded a great force for Iraqi unity, the Iraqi army. Second, we decided they needed a government like ours (complete with US advisors) and then we decided they needed to rewrite how they divide up revenue from oil for our benefit. Every aspect of Iraqi life had to be reeducated. Even traffic laws had to be rewritten! The police had to be retrained. This in a former police state! We gave them the opportunity to elect a government but once in place it little to no real authority. No truly independent state has it’s military command structure built into another countries like in Iraq. Nothing moves or happens in the Maliki government with out approval from the US. The on going situation with Blackwater USA is one of the latest examples of who really runs Iraq. The Iraqi government demanded them gone but they are still there with no indication they are leaving anytime soon. Even after years of reckless operations conducted by Blackwater and no telling how many Iraqi dead it is unlikely they will go. The company is too well connected to the current power structure in Washington to be tossed out. To the Iraqis it is easy to see what is going on.
It is well known that the peoples of Iraq are among the most educated in the Middle East. Still, we treat them as children or worse. We rewrite their laws for our own benefit. We play sides off of each other. We bring in even cheaper foreign labor to do “reconstruction”. We tell them they want to be free and democratic like us ignoring their long history and past occupation by the Ottomans and then the British. We dehumanize them with names like hagi and rag head. All of the negative things that come out of colonization we are doing today in Iraq. The State Department sends in reconstruction teams to advise on dispute resolution and reconciliation. There are some Iraqis who indeed want reconciliation but as long as we are there occupying the country this cannot happen. The government we have helped put in place and protect is not seen as legitimate by it’s own people, so when calling for reconciliation they have no authority or credibility. They also lack loyal military and police to enforce what they call for. Without US protection, the Maliki government would be pulled down in short order.
The Iraqis see the occupation for what it is and naturally resist it. We have gained nothing for the billions we have spent and all the lives lost. From the point of view as an empire the US is facing loss on a huge scale. The growing problem of Iraqi on Iraqi violence has not been solved by the “Surge” only postponed. We cannot sustain the “Surge” past next spring and nothing has been done to prevent the direct violence from returning. It is entirely possible President Bush knows how badly we have failed and wants to pass it on to who ever the next president is. The “Surge” is just a delaying tactic and with no addressing the underlying causes doomed to failure. In the mean time we are being attacked as well and the dip in US casualties is only temporary because we too are a big part of the problem. We the people of the US let this happen in our name.
The use of language is what makes continuing this war possible. Every speech on Iraq (and the larger “War on Terror”) President Bush calls those fighting us “terrorists”, “extremists” “Al Quad” “murders” etc. We on the other hand are on the side of “freedom” “liberty” and “democracy”. In the age of sound bite news with little to no in depth coverage or questioning of the facts many see the war in Iraq in these simplistic and black and white terms. Those who do question are called “unpatriotic”, “soft on terror” and worse. President Bush set the tone after the 9/11 attacks with his famous statement “You are with us or you are against us.” To be in the “with us” category people had to blindly accept whatever his administration put fourth without question. The media for the most part bought into the language set fourth. No one questioned how a war is fought against terror, a tactic or “embedding” reporters with the military which translates to be in bed with. Our opposition party, The Democrats, did not put fourth and alternative language or narrative of their own. Instead they became the “me too” party using the same language and same responses. It has gained them little. Despite winning both the house and senate on a clear antiwar mandate, they have done nothing effective to end the war in Iraq. They are still too afraid of being labeled “soft on terror” and continue to vote for funding the war indefinitely. Those who support the effort in it’s current form may be looking at it from beyond a rational point of view.
What should be a deep cause for concern is the Armageddon Syndrome. This is the idea we are in a great struggle of good versus evil that will end in a great final battle where good triumphs over evil once and for all. "We are in a conflict between good and evil. And America will call evil by its name," the president told West Point cadets in a speech in 2002. (Scott Ritter) 1. Bush has publicly stated that “God” talks to him. It is well known Christian Conservatives hold positions high up in the current administration. What may be less known is how much their notion of “end times” drives policy creation and execution. They may truly believe they are carrying our “God’s” will in Iraq and driving us to an expanded war in the region with Iran. In the mean time tax payer dollars keep filling the bank accounts of private security companies, weapons makers, oil companies, general contractors and a whole host of others at the expense of those we have ‘liberated”. The Iraqis gain nothing but assured misery, escalating violence, and the break up of their country. It will take decades to see the extent of the full damage we have done and begin to correct it.
1. “On the Eve of Destruction”
By Scott Ritter
10.22.07
No comments:
Post a Comment