Disaster watch
My obsession with Iraq
I haven't forgotten about Haiti but I'm not
following events there very closely. Once a month or so my curiosity asserts
itself and I check out my bookmarks,
curse the Bush administration and move on to other interests. Ever since Thomas
Jefferson American presidents have abused and thwarted Haiti's hopes
for democracy. I didn't expect anything different this year. I'm saddened but
not very engaged on a personal
level.
Iraq though, is a daily concern that borders on angry obsession. For better and worse I've hitched myself to the American occupation. I've gone back to listening to the hourly news reports on NPR, waiting for the insurrections to explode into civil war. I spend hours reading, watching and listening to arguments and debates in the press, on TV and over the radio. It's not enough to find reassurance and affirmation in the opinions of the pro-intervention side, I've got to sample the anti-war advocates as well and there are a few who come very close to convincing me that George W. should have listened to his father.
Most of my friends are anti-war. Some I've stopped talking to. Others have told me to not bring up the subject anymore. I'm appalled at their ignorance and callous disregard for the fate of the Iraqi people. But in all fairness it's not their war and I might very well have joined them in anti-war demonstrations a year ago. They feel about Iraq the way I feel about Haiti.
Nevertheless given what I know now, I'm not going to change my mind, no matter how badly things go with the occupation. The removal of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist party was the right thing for the Americans to do. Since then, despite all the blunders by Bush et al, the fate of Iraq has been in the hands of the Iraqi people. I still have hope they will be able to overcome the forces who are trying to return the country to fascism or its theocratic equivalent.
Most of my anger is aimed at the part of the anti-war movement on the left that has decided to support the insurgents. Calling themselves anti-imperialists their anti-Americanism has turned into praise for the Baathists and Sadrists who are terrorizing the country. These are the people who are calling for the immediate removal of American and coalition troops from Iraq regardless of the consequences.
There are many sane voices on the anti-war side who realize that the invaders have to stay in Iraq until elections are held and peace and civil order can be maintained. Even Ralph Nader has said this, the only remaining presidential candidate who opposed the war.
Instead of demanding that the troops come home the left should be crying out for elections now. The security situation is not going to improve until after a legitimate Iraqi government is chosen. Alas, many in the left have given up on democracy, believing it is only a fraudulent illusion in today's world, as one of my friends told me. Yet he is an anti-globalization activist who criticizes the undemocratic nature of international trade agreements. I don't think much of representative democracy myself, but it beats the existing alternatives. Just ask the Iraqi people.
There, end of rant. Here are some links to articles I read this morning which indirectly led to the above.
Peter Galbraith, author of "How to get out of Iraq" in the New York Review of Books, thinks civil war and the breakup of the country is the more likely future in Iraq. He proposes a loose federation like Yugoslavia (minus a Milosevic) and admits that may mean compromises such as sacrificing women's rights except in Kurdistan.
Pamela Boone, writing in The Age, says "The enemy is not America." She asks the question: "Why is international public opinion not outraged at the treatment of women in Islamic fundamentalist societies?"
Hak Mao has started a website, do_what, for those of us tired of being drowned out by the pro-Saddam lobby.
She lists organizations needing support such as the Iraqi Federation of Workers' Trade Unions (IFTU) and The Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq.
Here is her introduction:
Iraq though, is a daily concern that borders on angry obsession. For better and worse I've hitched myself to the American occupation. I've gone back to listening to the hourly news reports on NPR, waiting for the insurrections to explode into civil war. I spend hours reading, watching and listening to arguments and debates in the press, on TV and over the radio. It's not enough to find reassurance and affirmation in the opinions of the pro-intervention side, I've got to sample the anti-war advocates as well and there are a few who come very close to convincing me that George W. should have listened to his father.
Most of my friends are anti-war. Some I've stopped talking to. Others have told me to not bring up the subject anymore. I'm appalled at their ignorance and callous disregard for the fate of the Iraqi people. But in all fairness it's not their war and I might very well have joined them in anti-war demonstrations a year ago. They feel about Iraq the way I feel about Haiti.
Nevertheless given what I know now, I'm not going to change my mind, no matter how badly things go with the occupation. The removal of Saddam Hussein and his Baathist party was the right thing for the Americans to do. Since then, despite all the blunders by Bush et al, the fate of Iraq has been in the hands of the Iraqi people. I still have hope they will be able to overcome the forces who are trying to return the country to fascism or its theocratic equivalent.
Most of my anger is aimed at the part of the anti-war movement on the left that has decided to support the insurgents. Calling themselves anti-imperialists their anti-Americanism has turned into praise for the Baathists and Sadrists who are terrorizing the country. These are the people who are calling for the immediate removal of American and coalition troops from Iraq regardless of the consequences.
There are many sane voices on the anti-war side who realize that the invaders have to stay in Iraq until elections are held and peace and civil order can be maintained. Even Ralph Nader has said this, the only remaining presidential candidate who opposed the war.
Instead of demanding that the troops come home the left should be crying out for elections now. The security situation is not going to improve until after a legitimate Iraqi government is chosen. Alas, many in the left have given up on democracy, believing it is only a fraudulent illusion in today's world, as one of my friends told me. Yet he is an anti-globalization activist who criticizes the undemocratic nature of international trade agreements. I don't think much of representative democracy myself, but it beats the existing alternatives. Just ask the Iraqi people.
There, end of rant. Here are some links to articles I read this morning which indirectly led to the above.
Peter Galbraith, author of "How to get out of Iraq" in the New York Review of Books, thinks civil war and the breakup of the country is the more likely future in Iraq. He proposes a loose federation like Yugoslavia (minus a Milosevic) and admits that may mean compromises such as sacrificing women's rights except in Kurdistan.
Pamela Boone, writing in The Age, says "The enemy is not America." She asks the question: "Why is international public opinion not outraged at the treatment of women in Islamic fundamentalist societies?"
Hak Mao has started a website, do_what, for those of us tired of being drowned out by the pro-Saddam lobby.
She lists organizations needing support such as the Iraqi Federation of Workers' Trade Unions (IFTU) and The Organization of Women's Freedom in Iraq.
Here is her introduction:
What can you do to support the reconstruction of Iraq and the establishment of a free and secular democratic state?
Forge links with Iraqi workers, womens groups, and human rights activists. Give them financial and material support. Build public awareness of their work. Exert pressure on the US/UK led occupation to 'lift their game'.
The point of the exercise is not to support the so-called 'resistance', or to demand "troops out now", to bring about a socialist revolution, or shore up narrow sectarian interests. The object is to support Iraqis in the reconstruction of their country and the transition to representative democracy. The sooner that is achieved, the sooner the occupation will end.
Posted: Mon - April 26, 2004 at 12:05 PM
Quick Links
A blog by Jim Monk
XML/RSS Feed
Archives
Calendar
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
Categories
My Favourite Blogs
My Favourite Sites
Subscriptions
Windsor - Essex Blogs
Statistics
Total entries in this blog:
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 12, 2007 03:13 PM
Total entries in this category:
Published On: Sep 12, 2007 03:13 PM