Iraqis Finally Unite—Against the U.S.
By Robert Scheer
04/11/07 "Truth
Dig" -- -- You have to hand it to Sen. Joe
Lieberman, I-Conn., for having the chutzpah to cite the fiercely
anti-American rally that dominated the anniversary of Iraq’s
fourth year of U.S. occupation as evidence that the troop
“surge” is working. As opposed to Lieberman, who continues to
act as Bush’s overeager lap dog, his masters in the White House
knew better than to celebrate at this depressing moment.
After a weekend in which 10 U.S. soldiers were killed—four more
were killed on Monday, bringing the total to 45 already in
April—and the citizens of once bustling Baghdad cowered in their
homes under a U.S.-imposed round-the-clock curfew, President
Bush had the good sense for once to say not a word about the
glorious “liberation” of Iraq. Instead, as Dana Milbank noted in
The Washington Post, the president never mentioned Iraq in a
24-minute speech he gave on the happier subject of illegal
immigration, nor did any of his top aides touch on the topic.
The White House website ignored Iraq entirely under the heading
“LATEST NEWS,” instead featuring Clifford the Big Red Dog’s romp
at the South Lawn’s annual Easter egg hunt.
Meanwhile, back in liberated Iraq, the anniversary of Saddam
Hussein’s overthrow was marked by only one sign of public
response: In the Shiite holy city of Najaf, hundreds of
thousands gathered to burn American flags and otherwise denounce
the United States. “Yes! Yes! Iraq. No! No! America,” chanted
demonstrators organized by cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, reported the
BBC. “We were liberated from Saddam. Now we need to be liberated
again. Stop the suffering. Americans leave now.”
What part of “leave now” doesn’t Lieberman get? Speaking of the
rally called by Sadr to blast the Americans as Iraq’s
“archenemy” and to demand “that the occupiers withdraw from our
land,” Lieberman surreally sought to find a silver lining of
support for U.S. policy: “[Sadr] is not calling for a resurgence
of sectarian conflict. He’s striking a nationalist chord. He’s
acknowledging that the surge is working,” he said.
Ugh. What tortured logic. Ponder that sentence for the sheer
mendacity of its optimism, which conveniently ignores the fact
that the nationalist chord is a stridently anti-American one.
Yes, there were Sunni clerics in the Najaf march and Sadr’s
followers heeded his call to wrap themselves, literally, in the
Iraqi flag while shunning sectarian slogans—but what united them
was the demand to end the U.S. occupation, which Lieberman so
fervently supports.
So apparently the surge is working ... to unite all Iraqis
against us. As Hazim al-Araji, one of Sadr’s top Baghdad
representatives, described the by-all-accounts massive rally:
“There are people here from all different parties and sects. We
are all carrying the national flag, which is a symbol of unity.
And we are all united in calling for the withdrawal of the
Americans.”
What irony: The final refuge of the scoundrels who sold us on
this war, Lieberman included, was that although it could not be
justified by claims that Saddam had WMD or an alliance with al-Qaida
and Osama bin Laden, the invasion would implant American ideals
of democracy on Iraqi soil. What is being implanted instead is a
virulent anti-American and anti-Israeli nationalism, Sadr’s
current cause, competing with a smoldering sectarian civil war,
which this multitasking demagogue has also fueled. Yet, spinning
like a top, Sen. Lieberman desperately finds solace in a
resurgent Iraqi nationalism based on hatred of the United
States.
It is true that Sadr has consistently opposed the breakup of
Iraq into three ethnicity-based entities, but it is scant
comfort that this son of a famed Shiite cleric killed by Saddam
Hussein should now, in a sentiment that a recent ABC News poll
shows is shared by a majority of his countrymen, consider Iraq’s
self-proclaimed liberators as evil occupiers. Indeed, the legacy
of Bush’s invasion is that the tired anti-U.S. nationalism of
Saddam, never endorsed by the Shiite majority, now has a
virulent energy that it never previously possessed.
The only alternative to this Iraqi nationalism is not the
democratic and pro-Israel fantasy of the neoconservatives like
Lieberman who talked our clueless president into this
irresponsible folly, but rather the subjection of Iraq to a
Shiite militancy allied with Iran. Sadr, who is rumored to be
living these days in Iran, seems torn between those two futures,
perhaps positioning himself to benefit no matter which path
proves more popular.
Colin Powell was only partially right when he warned before the
U.S. invasion, “If you break it, you own it.” What he didn’t add
is that the locals will hate you for it, and try to kill you
every day until you give it back.
Copyright © 2007 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. -
http://www.truthdig.com
Click here
to comment on this and other articles
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
