It’s been eight months since the Americans marched into the deserts of Iraq, as part of the triumph of the West, in the now classic “clash of civilizations.” Since that time, the Iraqis have staged a resistance that has cost the lives of hundreds of Americans, sent the United Nations into retreat, and caused several nations to refrain from even attempting to intervene in the region.
Americans started the Iraq war on a series of false pretenses: (a) the war on terrorism, (b) Iraq’s role in supporting the jihadis of 9/11, and (c) Iraq’s imminent threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. The capture of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, has sent the American media and politicians into paroxysms of joy. It’s kind of like the second invasion of the country.
The Hussein capture is of a piece that is a U.S. attempt at nation-building. One of America’s chief architects of the Cold War found this aspect of Bush’s new Pre-emptive Strike Doctrine, wrong-headed. George Kennan called it “a great mistake in principle.” In a little noticed item in the congressional newspaper, The Hill, Kennan offered the opinion that a study of history teaches us, “That you might start a war with certain things in mind,” but inevitably, nations turn to fighting for things, “Never thought of before.” Of the second Iraqi war, Kennan noted, “It bears no relation to the first war against terrorism.” Further, Kennan was harshly critical of the Congress, upon whom rests the awesome responsibility to declare war, but he was particularly dismissive of congressional Democrats, whom he called “shameful, shabby, and timid,” in the face of Bush’s plans for war.
Kennan, 98 years old at the time of the September 2002 interview, was the formulator of the US containment policies of the past 50 years, and was US Ambassador to Moscow during the Soviet regime around 1952, and Ambassador to Yugoslavia in the early 60s. That this unabashed nationalist, conservative thinker is so critical of the present US course, is telling. Clearly Kennan sees imminent danger from the administration’s present course of action.
Even with the capture of Hussein, does anyone seriously believe that the armed resistance to the US occupation will cease? Saddam Hussein, president of the Iraqi state for over a generation, was not the engine nor even the spark, of the Iraqi resistance. That resistance is fueled by the presence and the behavior of Americans in a foreign land. The resistance is fueled by Iraqi nationalism, not love for the Hussein family. We shall see if this event dulls the fires of resistance. Surely, time will tell.
According to one scholar who has examined the present situation in Iraq, the US has done almost everything wrong. Alan Sorenson, associate editor of Current History, has observed, “The U.S. military failed to deploy enough force to establish security, permitting looting and lawlessness to continue unchecked. It initially appointed, then dismissed, a low-key, low profile coordinator to oversee reconstruction. It grossly underestimated the costs of restoring services and rebuilding infrastructure. It attempted to promote an emigre political figure with little experience in his native country. It failed to secure critical facilities, including arms caches, many of them still unguarded. It diverted significant resources and manpower to a failed attempt to find weapons of mass destruction. It consigned the Iraqi army to resentful unemployment. It emptied the government of knowledgeable technocrats. It invited Iraq’s former imperial masters from Turkey to join the occupation. It favored select American businesses in the distribution of no-bid contracts. It failed miserably to engage in effective public diplomacy. It ignored a pre-invasion State Department report that has laid out, with startling precision, many of the challenges now bedeviling authorities.” And Americans wonder why things are going so badly there.
The reason things are going so badly, is because it was ill conceived from the get-go, sold as the next step in the war against terrorism. The Iraq adventure is not really that, nor even nation building. It is empire building, with Iraq chosen to serve as demonstration model. The subjugation of Iraq is meant to teach other regimes in the region the meaning of American imperial power. Those are the real stakes in Iraq. From death row, this is Mumia Abu Jamal.
These commentaries are produced by Noelle Hanrahan for Prison Radio.