----- 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
