Two months
after the welcome demise of Saddam Hussein's regime, it has
become customary to say that the US won the war and is losing
the peace in Iraq. This formulation, coined to describe US neglect
of Afghanistan following the fall of the Taliban, gives the
Bush administration too much credit. There were never any serious
plans to "win the peace" in Iraq, as is obvious from
the chaotic aftermath of the large-scale combat.
There were
no plans to keep the Iraqi economy running with minimal interruption
-- US troops watched as looters pillaged ministries, laboratories,
factories and other places of employment, leaving thousands
of Iraqis without work. New US viceroy L. Paul Bremer's decommissioning
of the Iraqi army and overzealous de-Ba'thification have added
to the ranks of the unemployed. Though fear of nuclear proliferation
was a major justification cited for George W. Bush's preemptive
strike, US forces did not guard the nuclear facility at Tuwaitha,
and components of possible radiological weapons have vanished.
Despite much puffery in Washington about the "patrimony
of the Iraqi people," US troops stood by while thieves
relieved the National Museum of priceless artifacts. Even some
of the supposedly secured oilfields in the south were looted
of key equipment, helping to explain why today Iraq is pumping
only half the oil (between 600,000 to 700,000 barrels per day)
that it was pumping in the last days before the war.
Unable
so far to find weapons of mass destruction, the White House
is retroactively selling the war as a "humanitarian intervention."
But there is little sign to date of serious efforts to bring
Iraqi war criminals to justice. US troops loitered in the vicinity
while locals excavated a mass grave near Hilla with a hydraulic
backhoe, imperiling crucial forensic evidence of massacres after
the 1991 uprising. On May 18, US forces released a major suspect
in these very massacres, Muhammad Jawad al-Naifus, because the
interrogating officer was unaware of the charges against him.
Meanwhile, Saddam Hussein remains as elusive as the presumed
illicit arsenal in whose name Iraq was invaded.
Washington's
only serious plans for post-war Iraq have nothing to do with
"humanitarian intervention," and everything to do
with centralizing the levers of power in its own hands. After
intense US campaigning, the UN Security Council passed Resolution
1483 lifting economic sanctions on Iraq and placing the country's
oil revenues under the aegis of an "Occupying Authority"
composed of the US and Britain. Though it stamps a seal of approval
upon an occupation of indefinite duration, with scant UN involvement
and no timetable for the transition to indigenous Iraqi government,
UNSC 1483 does bind the US to the legal obligations of an occupying
power -- a label Washington had previously shunned for fear
of losing Iraqi "hearts and minds." The resolution
thus creates standards of accountability which the US may come
to regret as it polices the cities and hands out reconstruction
contracts. The General Accounting Office will be monitoring
a range of occupation and reconstruction policies on behalf
of Congress.
Belatedly,
media attention may hold Bush administration figures accountable
for force-feeding the public a diet of hype about the "mortal
threat" posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. In
the long term, Iraqis will care more to hold the US accountable
for the high-flown rhetoric promising that their "liberators"
will bequeath to them a free, democratic and prosperous Iraq.
The pre-war
fantasies, conjured by the Iraq hawks, that Ahmad Chalabi's
Iraqi National Congress and other returning exiles could rapidly
build Camelot on the Euphrates have evaporated. Bremer freely
refers to the US presence as an "occupation," and
has sidelined the seven-member "leadership council"
(of which Chalabi is a member) appointed by his predecessor
as viceroy. At press time, this body was vowing to proceed with
plans to convene a "national congress" to name an
interim Iraqi government, despite Bremer's intention to appoint
his own set of Iraqi advisors. Two months into the US occupation
of Iraq, Washington appears no more successful than other Middle
Eastern occupiers in its attempts to manipulate indigenous politics
to its own advantage. This issue of Middle East Report examines
some of the real-world obstacles blocking realization of the
war party's expansive vision for Iraq and the region.
MERIP
OP-EDS
A Country at a Crossroads The Austin-American Statesman (Austin, Texas) November 9, 2007
Kamran Asdar Ali
"A
very frank discussion"— so President Bush described
his Nov. 7 telephone
conversation with Pervez Musharraf, four days after the Pakistani
general
imposed a state of emergency and dissolved the high court expected
to rule
his continued presidency unconstitutional. And frank the discussion
probably
was: In the face of spirited protest in Pakistan, and a querulous
press in
Washington, back-channel pressure succeeded in persuading Musharraf
to
promise parliamentary elections. Yet the generous U.S. aid earmarked
for
Pakistan — on top of nearly $10 billion since 2001 — is
quite evidently not
at risk.
What may be at risk is Musharraf's tenure as head
of the military government. Full
story>>
The
war debate in Washington is bogged down. Partisan rancor is one
reason why, and bipartisan desire for US hegemony in the oil-rich
Persian Gulf is
another. But many Americans are vexed by a nobler concern: that
a
“precipitous” US departure from Iraq would leave intensified
civil war,
ethnic-sectarian cleansing and massive refugee flows in its wake.
This
concern is legitimate. Unfortunately, the sad fact is that Iraq’s
civil war
and humanitarian emergency have grown steadily worse as the US
military
deployment there wears on. Full
Story>>
Should
the United States, seeking to recalibrate the balance between
security and liberty in the "war on terror," emulate
Israel in its treatment of Palestinian detainees? That is the position
that Guantanamo detainee lawyers Avi Stadler and John Chandler
of Atlanta, and some others, have advocated. That people in U.S.
custody could be held incommunicado for years without charges,
and could be prosecuted or indefinitely detained on the basis of
confessions extracted with torture is worse than a national disgrace.
It is an assault on the foundations of the rule of law. Full
Story>>
There
is an oft-told Palestinian allegory about a family who complained
their house was small and cramped. In response, the father brought
the farm
animals inside -- the goat, the sheep and the chickens all crowded
into the
house. Then, one by one, he moved the animals back outside. By
the time the
last chicken left, the family felt such relief they never complained
of the
lack of elbow room again. Full
Story>>