----- 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