McCain
Is Deluding
Himself Over
The 'Surge'
There's a
hole in the
US argument,
and blood is
rushing
through
By Johann
Hari:
07/10/08
"The
Independent"
-- John
McCain is
desperate to
talk about
the surge
rather than
the splurge.
His Iraq war
is set to
cost one
trillion
dollars, and
his
deregulation-mania
has cost
hundreds of
billions. So
in order to
maintain his
façade of
being "tough
on
spending",
he needs to
shift the
subject.
That's why
he has tried
to shrink
the debate
about the
Iraq War to
one small
question.
Not: did
Saddam have
Weapons of
Mass
Destruction?
Not: did
Saddam have
links to
9/11? Not:
why do 70
per cent of
Iraqis think
the presence
of US troops
make them
less safe
and they
should go
home now?
McCain knows
he will lose
those
arguments,
so he wants
us to talk
solely about
whether the
surge of US
troops last
year has
been
successful.
But a hole
was just
blown in
that
argument –
and blood is
rushing
through.
Those of us
who got Iraq
wrong have a
particular
duty to
honestly
describe
what is
happening
now. A major
study by the
distinguished
scientific
journal
Environment
and Planning
A has just
revealed the
real
picture. The
Republican
nominee
claims the
US troops
have stopped
the violence
by their
physical
presence. To
test this,
Professor
John Agnew
and his
colleagues
used the
same
techniques
the US
government
has adopted
to monitor
ethnic-cleansing
in Burma and
Uganda.
Here's how
it works.
When an
entire
ethnic or
religious
group is
driven out,
they abandon
their houses
– and aren't
there to
switch on
the lights.
Their areas
become much
more dark.
If satellite
images show
night-light
remains the
same in the
areas
dominated by
one ethnic
group but
significantly
falls in
mixed areas,
you know
ethnic
cleansing is
happening.
So what
happened in
Iraq?
Before,
during and
after the
surge, the
areas that
had always
been Sunni
and those
that had
always been
Shia were
brighter
than ever.
But in the
vast mixed
areas, half
or more of
the lights
went out in
the six
months
leading up
to the
surge. They
then
stabilised
in
half-darkness.
By the time
the US
troops
arrived,
there were
no more
mixed areas
left. The
easy
pickings –
the Shia who
lived next
door, or the
Sunni who
lived up the
road – had
all been
attacked.
Sunni and
Shia weren't
killing each
other any
more because
they had
retreated
into vast
enclaves,
cleansed and
armed,
surrounded
by barriers
manned by
militias.
Four million
people had
been driven
from their
homes.
Professor
Agnew
explains:
"Our
findings
suggest the
surge has
had no
observable
effect,
except
insofar as
it has
helped to
provide a
seal of
approval for
the process
of
ethno-sectarian
neighbourhood
homogenisation
that is now
largely
achieved."
The new US
troops have
simply built
concrete
walls
between the
newly-cleansed
areas.
This study
is a bleak
vindication
of my
colleague
Patrick
Cockburn,
who has been
almost alone
in telling
the human
story of the
cleansing.
Here's an
example. In
May 2006,
four gunmen
turned up at
the house of
Leila
Mohammed, a
pregnant
mother of
three
children in
north-east
of Baghdad.
"Be gone by
evening
prayers or
we will kill
you," they
said. She
was a Shia
in a Sunni
neighbourhood,
so she had
to run, or
die. "Later
I went back
to try to
get our
furniture
but there
was too much
shooting and
I was
trapped in
our house,"
Leila said.
"I came away
with
nothing."
Now imagine
millions of
Leilas, and
you have
much of Iraq
today.
Those who
try to get
past the
checkpoints
and walls to
their old
neighbourhoods
find that
the
intercommunal
hatred has
not been
soothed.
Cockburn
gives one
typical
example:
"When one
couple, both
Shia, went
last month
to visit the
house from
which they
had fled in
the Sunni
al-Makanik
district of
Dora in
south
Baghdad,
they were
immediately
shot dead
and their
driver
beheaded."
Yet Obama
has failed
to properly
challenge
this
propaganda-surge
about the
surge. He
echoes the
McCain line
that "the
surge has
succeeded
beyond our
wildest
dreams", and
shifts the
conversation
back to the
decision to
invade in
the first
place. He
has
evidently
concluded
that this
case is too
complex and
too easily
attacked
with the
ludicrous
charge that
he is "criticising
the troops."
So McCain is
getting away
with braying
about the
"great
success" of
wrapping one
of the worst
programmes
of ethnic
cleansing of
our time in
towering
concrete
walls of
reinforcement.
