Who is fighting in Iraq? I talked to a well-known Arab nationalist leader who has close ties to people and groups in Iraq, and others, and have formed the following impression of Iraqi developments. The media are exaggerating the role of Zarqawi and his savage gangs, and that may be not only due to ignorance but also due to deliberate attempts by the new Ba`th of Iraq to obfuscate reality. The new Iraqi Ba`th has been reformed and restructured, and while they do have criticisms (finally) of the Saddam era, they still treat him as the "symbol" of leadership, and are impressed with his stand in jail (no mention of his handwashing skills, as of yet). The Zarqawi and Bin Ladenite groups have been able to intensify the attacks as of late because they have been able (primarily through large sums of money) to recruit former soldiers but most importantly officers and some high ranking officers of the dissolved Iraqi army. Thus, the newly formed Faylaq `Umar (the birth of which was announced by Bin Ladenite sites) is none other than a former Iraqi army squadron, if that is the right technical term in English. The new Ba`th has been in negotiation with other groups and parties, and have only recently agreed that the leadership in the new Iraq should be decided by a free vote, once the occupiers leave the country. What I find very interesting is that the mess in Iraq has led people inside Iraq to speak now about the post-occupation era. It now hovers over political meetings inside and outside Iraq, I am told. A major conference of anti-occupation forces will be held in a couple of weeks in an Arab capital, and will for the first time include representatives of the Ba`th and of Muqtada As-Sadr. I maintain that As-Sadr should not be counted out of Iraq's future especially that he has been very quietly and not-so-quietly building ties and cultivating relations with many Sunni groups opposed to the occupation, taking advantage of the high strong Sunni antipathy against the Badr's milias. The torture and the cruelty exhibited by the new Iraqi police and army forces (which include much of the Badr Brigades) have discredited the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, at least among Sunnis and others. I am told that Shi`ite Ba`thist cadres who had been hiding in Sunni areas in the North have recently been permitted to return to the South. Such is the mood in the new "liberated" Iraq where opposition to occupation and revulsion from the violence and mayhem of everyday's life may have changed the rules and formulas of politics. The Ba`th is increasingly becoming assertive and often hide behind the declared Sunni political groupings. The Ba`thists (historically) have been very skillful (and equally criminal and murderous) when they conspire to seize power. This has been true in Syria and in Iraq, but especially in Iraq. Iraqi Ba`thists brag that Saddam was caught because he sought the shelter of his family and clan, and that `Izzat Ad-Duri survived because since the 7th of April, he has not been in touch with any family member, and relied on the party for his hiding techniques. It pains me that George W. Bush will be out of office when the American people finally realize how dumb his policies were, and how disastrous his "liberation" wars have been, even by the standards of US interests. One only wishes that the killing of innocent civilians in Iraq would lead people in the US to stand opposed to the current occupation that made it possible for Zarqawi and others to operate so freely. But never forget this: that occupation, every occupation, kills and hurt civilians by its very nature, and produces within its womb (to use the logic of Hegel) the dynamics of its own destruction. Maybe we need another century to agree on the futility of foreign occupation. This is the dreadful premise of Zionism, and why Zionism would never last. It is doomed because it is based on the notion that "our occupation" will be different and will last in bliss.