----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, November 01, 2003 3:04
PM
Subject: [Futurework] Iraq Realities (was
Ramadan....)
Greetings, Harry,
There are several truths about Iraq, and they are
only superficially incongruent. In fact, they are all aspects of the same
situation.
1.
Yes, it is quite possible for Westerners and even Americans to travel about
Iraq safely. The prerequisites are that the visitor not be associated with the
US/UK invasion, that he be in sync logistically with what daily life has
devolved to, and that he fit within the patterns of traditional Iraqi welcome
and hospitality. None of these prerequisites are hard to
meet.
2.
For those who are there with the invasion, they are, to put it simply,
targets. This will get worse and worse, to the point the US seeks a way out.
It may be like the infamous retreat from Viet Nam -- the fatal and egotistic
"peace with Honor" demanded by Nixon and Kissinger. May they answer for the
tens of thousands of lives that were lost as a result. Or it may be like the
retreat from Mogadishu, clean and politically courageous though
embarrassing. With Bush and advisors, it is most likely to be the
former, if Bush is still around to preside over the
defeat.
3.
Iraqis who collaborate with the US are in jeopardy, and there will be some
Iraqis who make a point of harassing and from time to time killing
them. These people are viewed as traitors, though some believe that they
are helping create conditions in which the US will leave.
4.
Iraq and the US invasion will increasingly serve as a magnet to people who are
willing to use force against the American presence in the Middle East and the
Muslim world generally. In the same way that Muslims from all over the
world went to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, so will they go to fight the
US in Iraq. No one should be surprised by this, nor view it as a 'new'
reality. But it is important to realize that the glamour of 'foreign
fighters' not withstanding, as in Afghanistan, the strength and bulk of
resistance to the US occupation of Iraq comes from the Iraqis themselves. They
have plenty of technical military skill, weapons, war materials, training,
communication networks and motivation to do it all themselves. Foreign
assistance will be welcomed and much public relations advantage gained for
them -- solidarity, etc. --
5. Generally, Iraqis do not want the
US to remain in Iraq. No one there is impressed with the 'we are here to
help', 'we are bringing democracy' nonsense. Of course, many Iraqis are
delighted with the US' willingness to pour billions into Iraq and will be
happy to receive portions of that. But this does not translate into approval
of the US invasion or presence. This is a fundamental reality that US
policy-makers seem blissfully unaware of, and part of the overwhelming
ignorance that pervades US knowledge of Iraq and the Middle East,
generally.
6.
To the extent that Westerners start to understand Iraq and the Middle East,
they light of some exotic-sounding factoid, and then see everything that
happens through that perspective. Nowhere is this more evident in the
discovery of shi'is, sunnis, Ba'athists, the 'Sunni Triangle', Marsh Arabs,
etc. The reality is that none of these support the US/UK invasion of presence.
Left alone, I think the chances of a civil war are extremely low, though I
would guess that we would see quite a bit of old scores being evened.
The US presence skews and undermines the process of Iraq rebuilding itself, as
we are 'playing favorites', forcing many Iraqis into collaborating (if only by
dangling money in front of them), and pushing some into guerilla actions
against the occupying forces, and all the social dynamics that go along with
that.
7.
We can foresee Arab-Kurdish fighting, I think. And I don't think that -- stay
or leave -- the US will be able to prevent that. For many decades,
Western powers have tried to favor one ethnic group in the Middle East over
another, and it has never succeeded. Past examples of such efforts
include: Armenia, Kurds, Greeks (in Anatolia), Hashemites, Maronites, Copts,
French pieds-noirs in Algeria, Berbers in Morocco, and Turkish Cypriots. We
have a current example in Palestine, where the West supported Jewish-Zionist
migration and where, it is becoming increasingly clear, only disaster
awaits.
8.
All but the hard-core Ba'athists were delighted to get rid of Saddam Hussein
-- no doubt about that! But that does not mean that the US is welcome to
stay. The Iraqis are a pretty sophisticated people, compared to
Americans, and are far more able to rebuild their country than anyone
else. The notion that they need outside help is, to put it simply,
laughable, though it would be nice if the US and others compensated Iraq for
the economic suffering and destruction caused by the sanctions and
invasion.
Best
regards,
Lawry
Lawry,
Keith, in particular, was not very happy about my
posting Stein's article, in which he wandered around the hinterland of Iraq,
including Saddam land and the northern oilfield, apparently without being
harmed or even fearing harm.
This, because Stein's truth was not the revealed
truth of most of the journalists who report on Iraq. Then I posted, Jon
North of England's Channel four who visited Baghdad, expecting the worst
(like many UK news outlets, bad news is good news). He spent the day at the
races along with thousands of other Iraqis. The biggest danger seemed to be
emptying your wallet. Maybe things are not so bad as some people
hope that are.
This anti-Bush fervore really prevents
people from thinking and observing.
One notes that a couple of people with
rifles practically brought DC to its knees. I would place the happenings in
Iraqi in the same category.
Relatively few people -- with some certainly
from across the borders -- causing lots of trouble.
Serious? Certainly, because they kill people and
cause heavy damage.
Absolute disaster? No, it's just something to
be dealt with.
Harry