A homecoming parade of Iraq war truths
By Ramzy Baroud
The soldiers of the US 4th Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division hollered as
they made their way into Kuwait. "We won," they claimed. "It’s over."
But what exactly did they win?
And is the war really over?
It seems we are once again walking into the same trap, the same nonsensical
assumptions of wars won, missions accomplished, troops withdrawn, and jolly
soldiers carrying cardboard signs of heart-warming messages like "Lindsay &
Austin ... Dad’s coming home."
While much of the media is focused on the logistics of the misleading
withdrawal of the "last combat brigade" from Iraq on August 19 - some
accentuating the fact that the withdrawal is
happening two weeks ahead of the August 31 deadline - most of us are guilty of
forgetting Iraq and its people. When the economy began to take center stage, we
completely dropped the war off our list of grievances.
But this is not about memory, or a way of honoring the dead and feeling
compassion for the living. Forgetting wars leads to a complete polarization of
discourses, thus allowing the crafters of war to sell the public whatever suits
their interests and stratagems.
In an August 22 Washington Post article entitled "Five myths about the Iraq
troop withdrawal", Kenneth M Pollack unravels the first "myth": "As of this
month, the United States no longer has combat troops in Iran." Pollack claims
this idea is "not even close" because "roughly 50,000 American military
personnel remain in Iraq, and the majority are still combat troops - they're
just named something else. The major units still in Iraq will no longer be
called "brigade combat teams" and instead will be called "advisory and
assistance brigades". But a rose by any other name is still a rose, and the
differences in brigade structure and personnel are minimal.
So what if the US army downgrades its military presence in Iraq and re-labels
over 50,000 remaining soldiers? Will the US military now stop chasing after
perceived terrorist threats? Will it concede an inch of its unchallenged
control over Iraqi skies? Will it relinquish power over the country’s
self-serving political elite? Will it give up its influence over every relevant
aspect of life in the country, from the now autonomous Kurdish region in the
north all the way to the border with Kuwait in the south, which the jubilant
soldiers crossed while hollering the shrieks of victory?
The Iraq war has been one of the most well-controlled wars the US has ever
fought, in terms of its language and discourse. Even those opposed to the war
tend to be misguided as to their reasons: "Iraqis need to take charge of their
own country"; "Iraq is a sectarian society and America cannot rectify that";
"It is not possible to create a Western-style democracy in Iraq"; "It’s a good
thing Saddam Hussein was taken down, but the US should have left straight
after". These ideas might be described as "anti-war", but they are all based on
fallacious assumptions that were fed to us by the same recycled official and
media rhetoric.
It’s no wonder that the so-called anti-war movement waned significantly after
the election of President Barack Obama. The new president merely shifted
military priorities from Iraq to Afghanistan. His government is now re-branding
the Iraq war, although maintaining the interventionist spirit behind it. It
makes perfect sense that the US State Department is now the one in charge of
the future mission in Iraq. The occupation of Iraq, while it promises much
violence and blood, is now a political scheme. It requires good public
relations.
The State Department will now supervise future violence in Iraq, which is
likely to increase in coming months due to the ongoing political standoff and
heightened sectarian divisions. An attack blamed on al-Qaeda in an Iraqi army
recruitment center on August 17 claimed 61 lives and wounded many. "Iraqi
officials say July saw the deaths of more than 500 people, including 396
civilians, making it the deadliest month for more than two years," reported
Robert Tait in Radio Free Europe.
Since the March elections, Iraq has had no government. The political rift in
the country, even among the ruling Shi'ite groups, is large and widening. The
disaffected Sunnis have been humiliated and collectively abused because of the
misguided claim that they were favored by Saddam. Hate is brewing and the
country’s internal affairs are being handled jointly by some of the most
corrupt politicians the world has ever known.
Washington understands that it needs to deliver on some of Obama’s many
campaign promises before the November elections. Thus the re-branding campaign,
which could hide the fact that the US has no real intention of removing itself
from the Iraq’s military or political milieus. But since the current number of
military personnel might not be enough to handle the deepening security chaos
in the country, the new caretakers at the State Department are playing with
numbers.
"State Department spokesman P J Crowley said [a] plan would bring to some 7,000
the total security contractors employed by the government in Iraq, where since
the 2003 US invasion private security firms have often been accused of acting
above the law," according to Reuters.
It’s important that we understand the number game is just a game. Many colonial
powers in the past controlled their colonies through the use of local forces
and minimal direct involvement. Those of us oppose the Iraq war should do so
based on the guiding principle that foreign invasions, occupations and
interventions in sovereign countries’ affairs are a direct violation of
international law. It is precisely the interventionist mindset that must be
confronted, challenged, and rejected.
While it is a good thing that that thousands of American dads are now coming
home, we must also remember that hundreds of thousands of Iraqi moms and dads
never did. Millions of refugees from the US-led invasion are still circling the
country and the Middle East.
War is not about numbers and dates. It’s about people, their rights, their
freedom and their future. Re-branding the army and the war will provide none of
this for grief-stricken and vulnerable Iraqis.
The fact is, no one has won this war. And the occupation is anything but over.
Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated
columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is
My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story(Pluto Press,
London), now available on Amazon.com.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
