Reconciliation, Texas style
Post-invasion iraq - - Posted on March, 27 at 5:07 pm by Ken L
You remember the justification for Teh Surge? Yes I know, it’s a stupid name for what military folk have been doing since forever when they’re in trouble, namely ’sending reinforcements’. But announcing he was sending reinforcements to something he insists on calling a war would suggest that Bush thought his imperial legions were in a spot of bother, and that would have been embarrassing given all the ‘Mission Accomplished’ bragging that we all remember so well. Besides, he needed a gimmick to help the new Iraq meme (flogged so impressively ever since by John McCain) that David Petraeus is some kind of once-in-a-millenium genius. Saying he was going to send Petraeus reinforcements would have been kind of ordinary. Thus we had Teh Surge in all its glory, followed now apparently by a feeling that the reinforcements might have to stick around more or less indefinitely so the spinmeisters have come up with a new name Teh Pause.
Christ they’re a lot of wankers. Anyway where was I … oh yeah, the reason for sending reinforcements. It was ‘political reconciliation’: to allow the factions in Iraq to resolve their differences, thereby fostering a more democratic system of governance that increased the effectiveness of the national government and led to a steady diminution of sectarian violence.
Or at least that’s what most people thought was meant by political reconciliation, but it appears the Bush mob has a different conception in mind.
As you’ve no doubt read, an ominous new shitfight has broken out in Iraq, centred on Basra and those parts of Baghdad dominated by militias loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr, whose faction has about 30 seats in parliament. The Mehdi Army caused a lot of problems for the Iraqi government until al-Sadr declared a unilateral cease-fire a bit over a year ago, and they have some serious differences with the al-Maliki Government. I thought therefore, in my naive way, that political reconciliation might mean the government would try and make peace with the Sadrists.
However, the opposite appears to be the case. The fighting that’s broken out seems to be (one can never be sure of course, given the relentless bullshit we’ve been fed from Iraq for the last five years) but seems to be a deliberate attack by government forces on the al-Sadr militias. Again from my perversely naive standpoint I would have thought this wasn’t really in the spirit of reconciliation but apparently I was wrong:
In Washington, White House Deputy Secretary Tony Fratto told reporters that the operation “is exactly what we all want to see — which is the government of Iraq taking the initiative that was afforded to it by the surge and going aggressively after illegal criminal gangs and illegal militias in the Basra region.”
So there you have it … George W Bush’s version of political reconciliation: send in the troops to shoot the other party. I guess it’s a Texas thing, “Bring ‘em on” and all that. Petraeus addresses Congress again next month. I bet the standing ovation this time will be even longer than last year. I wouldn’t be surprised if Joe Lieberman and a few other warmongers faint away from the sheer euphoria of being in the same room.
Presumably the Sunnis will be next to be reconciled. Al-Maliki will want to take back all the weapons they were given by the yanks to fight terrorists. What a wretched pantomime we helped unleash.
Posted in Post-invasion iraq |
March 27th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
“Teh Pause”
That moment that comes after a long and brutal struggle, when it finally dawns on you that it was an obviously bad choice to get into that fight in the first place, you have completely fucked up the handling of it from the start and need to get the hell out of there, but there is no good way out, and everybody watching on (in this case, the whole world) knows it and will never forget what happened.
March 27th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Maybe they need a second ammendment:
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”
March 27th, 2008 at 9:05 pm
Al Sadr must be taller than Petsy.Remember that song Walk Tall.I think there was a reference to Texas.I dont care,if Al Sadr hates anyone that isnt a Muslim,I feel no justice exists in Iraq,he is neither friend or foe,but as a leader of some,in a very insulting offensive and disgusting human environment,not necessarily created by him and his followers,all I can say,I hope he survives,not as friend or enemy,but, the simple wish, a simple observation,I am here,and, never let it be here!?And the it can be named,wether Godless or not.The USA cannot be respected as the impetus for more caring humanity.They have tried this on over and over again.They betray humanity by their justifications.Sadr remains a troubled human,Geo.W.Bush couldnt handle his predicament.And most of the others couldnt either,incl. the gormless McCain!
March 27th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
GASP! you mean they’ve been lying to us about how things are actually dapper in Iraq since the genius Surge was put into effect by the Village Idiot?
March 27th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
This whole issue further reinforces the failure of the US invasion, at least in terms of an unwanted transition from a largely secular state during Saddam’s era, to one now deeply divided on religious lines.
The media might be quick to make the claim that previously there existed religious division in the country, and to an extent that was true. But by and large, the Iraq that was invaded in 2003 was a secular state where religious parties were outlawed and religious figures were persecuted. (Perhaps for good reason.)
The power vacuum that emerged after the removal of Saddam allowed for the rapid escalation in power of different minority groups, notably the Madhi Army that is now being suppressed by the supposedly secular government.
This can hardly be seen as progress; whereas before groups such as these were kept underfoot and out of trouble, now the government is struggling to contain them.
The efforts of the pro-war backers are becoming increasingly desperate to find signs of progress in Iraq, and this is one such example. ‘Progress’ or ’success’ will now be to attain a level of security no greater than what existed prior to the invasion. And we have to forget that the invasion was to remove a brutal dictator who supressed religious minorities, which is exactly now what Teh Surge is aiming to do.
March 27th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
It’s reconciliation, Ken, but not as we know it.
Kind of like peace processes where you bomb the other mob as soon as there is a ceasefire.
BTW one way of looking at the Basra crackdown (I know, Pepe again) is in terms of the elite family feuds that dominate Iraqi politics and which the US seeks to leverage. The al-Hakim family (now in favour) is an old adversary of the al-Sadr family, which Muqtada represents. The attack on Basra, blessed by the Yanks, is another example of divide and conquer.
Maybe the deal was that the al-Hakims would stop being so chummy with Iran.
Presumably the Sunnis will be next to be reconciled.
Yep.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:58 am
And interestingly…or should we say worryingly?…Petraeus immediately blames the Green Zone attacks on the Iranians.
This is worth reading:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JC28Ak03.html
(Muqtada cuts free
By Gareth Porter, 28th March, 08
Asia Times Online)
I’m not surprised McCain has started spelling out his differences from Bush in recent days. His intense support for “The Surge” just might turn out to be his Achilles Heel.
One wonders if the American government would’ve been better off using all that cash, dolled out to Sunni & Shia militias and various Corporate entities, to have bought off Saddam they way they have the Libyan fella.
A horrible thought…but I’m wondering if many an Iraqi & US soldier is beginning to feel same. How many would still be alive today?
It’s all very sad really.
March 28th, 2008 at 3:11 am
Andrew said: The media might be quick to make the claim that previously there existed religious division in the country, and to an extent that was true.
Unfortunately Andrew we have to take anything we read in the mainstream media w/ more than a cup of salt.
Former CIA Analyst Ray McGovern gives an interesting assessment of Frontline’s “Bush’s War” here:
http://www.counterpunch.com/mcgovern03262008.html
…basically he sees the production as providing a fairly tepid, toned down look at the skullduggery & “power-grabbing” that went on behind the scenes in the build up to the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent events that have led to this oft perceived “stalemate”. Tho the doco does offer some intriguing moments:
“At one point, however, the garrulous former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage did allude to one of the largest elephants in the living room-Israel’s far-right Likudniks-and their close alliance with the so-called neo-conservatives running our policy toward the Middle East. But Armitage did so only tangentially, referring to the welcome (if totally unrealistic) promise by Ahmed Chalabi that, upon being put in power in Baghdad, he would recognize Israel. Not surprisingly, the interviewer did not pick up on that comment; indeed, I’m surprised the remark avoided the cutting room floor.”
McGovern goes on to state that Robert Greenwald’s “Uncovered” was basically revealing similar info 4 1/2 yrs ago…which leads him to reflect on “media intimidation”
…& that’s where the name of freelance journalist and producer, Kristina Borjesson comes up.
I remembered that Borjesson had been interviewed by the BUZZFLASH blog back in Jan 05:
BuzzFlash: Finally, is there any hope that the tacit coupling of our media and our national government can be derailed by the truth seeping out through new media outlets? Is there a chance of resurrecting a free media, the kind which our founding fathers used to foment the ideas for the American Revolution? Today, who would give Tom Paine a second on one of the news talk shows? Bill O’Reilly would tell him to just shut up.
Kristina Borjesson: Sure there’s hope. A new news paradigm is being created as I write this. First of all, you have to appreciate how revolutionary the Internet has been as a development that is giving the mainstream media a real run for its money. Lots of great reporters, bloggers and otherwise average citizens are taking full advantage of the Internet as a place to exchange information. The Internet is also raising awareness and serving as a powerful antidote against American provincialism, which can only help to create large-scale demand for real, unvarnished reporting. Network and cable news programs today have a fraction of the audience that each network used to have, and they’re fighting to hang on to that.
Another good thing is that citizens all over the country, including those at big companies and government agencies like the CIA and the Pentagon–are stepping forward and exposing situations and revealing information that the public needs to know and that the mainstream press would never otherwise report on.
————
More than 3 years on…& how far have we come?
With all the bloggers and commentors working over-time…all the whistleblowers who have bravely stepped forward…can we honestly say much has changed? Sure, a few fines have been paid by companies involved in Iraq. Some low level soldiers have been punished for torturing & abusing inmates/POWs…Rumsfeld and a few subordinates have stood down…& a few Govt. officials, politicians and Generals have been questioned intensely causing red faces & shortness of breath.
Big deal.
For all the efforts of the justice seekers…& the claims by journos in the Corporate Press that they are “uncovering the facts” behind the Iraq War…we are still stuck with a sense that
“the Busheviks and their Enablers have gotten away with it”
And sometimes i wonder if it has to do with a public that is unwilling to question the integrity & veracity behind its media of choice, and those who run it, because they really don’t give a crap about “a bunch of dead towel heads” who they reckon have been giving Christians & Jews a hard time for yonks…& a bunch of volunteer soldiers who they reckon might be better off “fighting over there” rather than “playing up over here”…
After observing the public’s willingness to soak in the burning rays of the “race war” that has been playing out on primetime American television by way of the Presidential campaign, i wouldn’t be surprised if the wealthy manipulators and strategic chess players who brought us the IRAQ FIASCO, a BANKRUPT AMERICAN government, the ENERGY CON…& the ECONOMIC CONTRACTION…aren’t all having a good laugh at our expense.
When we allow our media to define our beliefs and expectations…dash our hopes…justify their theft…and cause us to fight amongst each other, it means WE are not SCRUTINISING them…and their bosses.
The ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) in Australia, an advertising-free venture, is going more automated. Cutting valuable staff:
Graeme Thompson, the secretary of the ABC section of the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU), says the union is ready to talk to management about the changes.
Mr Thompson says although he does not oppose the introduction of new technologies, he does have some reservations.
“Automation of TV studio will limit production,” he said.
“It will drive further production outsourcing to the private sector.
(ABC News Thu Mar 27, 2008)
———
And so the drumbeat to nowhere goes on…
N’
March 28th, 2008 at 8:42 am
Oh goody, now Iraq can have a theocracy and any progress for women (education, employment, driving, clothing, independence of movement) gained under Saddam has been snatched away.
Women are being forced into burqua and having whatever rights they had snatched away. And “honour” killings won’t be far behind. This invasion has sure been a huge success!
March 28th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
When will the inevitable be acknowledged, that there was no Iraq prior to 1922 when Britain & France carved up the corpse of Ottoman Mesopotamia. In standard divide-and-rule colonial style, the british bolted together mutually antagonistic groups, Shia, Sunni & Kurd in this case, and installed a Hashemite (basicaly bedouin) ‘king’ to sit on the pile.
Why the fetish to hold together such a marriage - for the sake of the kids?!?