The Iraqi Miracle – From Invasion to “Partnership”
By James Rothenberg
11/28/07 "ICH" -- - -What the U.S. had in mind for Iraq was
already clear in the Fall of 2001, even though it would take
another year and a half to implement the attack, mercilessly
known as shock and awe. By the time of the attack, many millions
of U.S. citizens knew full well the real motivation behind it.
Not that it mattered, or could matter.
The propaganda campaign waged by the government proved too
effective for the scared, at large population. Their gullibility
level was pushed to record heights by the administration’s deep
handbag of shifting rationalizations and calls to patriotism. In
short, the population was overmatched.
With some admirable exceptions, congresspersons, not known for
gullibility, went along for different reasons. Ultimately not to
stick their necks out.
A politician’s main job is to stay elected. This is true because
they are not limited to a single term. If they were limited to a
single term they might be more inclined to assert their
individuality. The usual argument against the single term limit
is that by then they are just learning their way around. But
that’s the trouble – that there is a “way around”. That means
knowing who to kiss up to, who’s useful, who will deal and who
will pay. Do we really think that if we had a totally new
Congress nothing could get done, because nobody knows their way
around? We did have an all new Congress in this country. Once.
The media, again with a few admirable exceptions, took the
occasion to demonstrate their compliancy. Distinguished less by
gullibility than by hard-boiled cynicism, they nonetheless
faithfully repeated every administration handout without
challenge, indeed, without comment.
Now what was it that was so clear to some from the very
beginning? That a takeover of Iraq was a natural way to
establish a permanent military presence in the heart of the
resource-rich Middle East. This was not a departure from
longstanding American foreign policy goals but merely its latest
iteration. Iraq happens to harbor the second largest proven oil
reserves and oil just happens to be entering its scarcity mode.
The morning newspaper carries an Associated Press story
detailing the signing by President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister
al-Maliki of a “declaration of principles” between the two
countries, which, for those still interested in the real reason
we invaded Iraq, amounts to a full confession. Not in front of
the International Criminal Court (that’s not for us) but
mainstreamed, normalized, now fit to print.
Iraq’s government will “embrace a long-term U.S. troop presence
in return for U.S. security guarantees [referred to in another
business as a protection racket] as part of a strategic
partnership…an enduring relationship in military, economic and
political terms.” In addition, the agreement provides for U.S.
support for the “democratic regime in Iraq against domestic and
external dangers” (the “danger” being that they would be outside
One should not be surprised that Iraq’s U.S. supported leaders
find amenable the terms set for them by Washington. What else
would one expect between a dependent client state and its
master, the client obliged to obey and the master prepared to
reward useful service?
The agreement specifically seeks (details have to be worked out
you see) “preferential treatment for American investments.” At
this point we might recall that the clever war marketeers chose
not to use Operation Iraqi Liberation which would be lampooned
Cutely, Lt. Gen. Lute, Bush’s adviser on the wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan, claims the question of whether military bases are
required is “on the negotiating table”. Not according to the
Iraqi officials cited in the same story who “foresee a long-term
presence of about 50,000 U.S. troops” at those bases.
In keeping with established practices of imperialist plunderers,
the invader now guarantees the security of the invaded. When you
think security, don’t think of being secure. Think prison and
graveyard. The security is for the government. And when a state
of emergency is declared in this country (just suppose), think
that the emergency has nothing to do with the population. The
emergency will be real, but it will be to the government.
James Rothenberg - email@example.com
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
See our complete
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
Send Page To a Friend
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.)