A source on politics, war, the Middle East, Arabic poetry, and art.
Friday, August 26, 2005
What is going on in Iraq. The situation is so out of control of US hands, and I am not even referring to the security situation. The crowds that turned out for As-Sadr yesterday tells a story that is missing from much of the US coverage. Much of the US media as you know dismissed As-Sadr as "finished" when US troops went to battle against the Mahdi Army. Yet, despite his lack of religious rank, and despite his lack of charisma, and despite his fanatical recipe of governance, he seems to continue to enjoy a following especially among the poor in Shi`ite areas. I had predicted, praise be to me, a few weeks ago, that As-Sadr will be a major political figure in post-occupation Iraq. I simply watch developments in Iraq, and see what resemblances there are to South Lebanon under Israeli occupation, and who rose and who sank when Israel was kicked out of most of region. His very careful cultivation of ties with Sunni groups will prove crucial in post-occupation Iraq, and that does not apply to the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq--with a name like that, you wonder how the brilliant US neo-cons failed to notice the religious factor in Iraq. Yesterday, a Sunni group known as Mujahidi Al-Anbar and Fallujah issued a statement in which they "saluted the heroic stance" of As-Sadr, and said that "our lands and blood are for you." Also, I never thought that Iraqis would ever declare sympathy for Saddam after his overthrow, but the US occupation seems to bolster the stance of Saddam among some Sunnis. Yesterday, thousands demonstrated in Sunni areas, and among the slogans was: "Bush, Bush, listen carefully; we all love Saddam Husayn." (It rhymes in Arabic). I personally think that the sooner the US (and Macedonia) leaves Iraq the better, and I never understand those US "liberals"--not to mention others--who wonder in artificial concern, about the status of Iraq without US troops. They wonder whether Iraq would descend into instability and chaos without occupation. Two things on that. First, we have to support the principle of independence and self-determination for all people, and those who urge that we accommodate a "transitional" period are reviving colonial arguments, without even knowing it. Secondly, I say this: could Iraq be worse off than what we see today? Lastly, I noticed that the US occupation suddenly has released 1000 prisoners from Abu Ghrayb prison. Just like that. No trial, and no due process. And I hate to be picky, but help me in this. Did the US not "surrender sovereignty" to Iraqis last year? Imagine if the US hosts Chinese army troops on its territory who run their own prisons in US, holding American citizens? Would Americans consider US sovereign in that scenario? Would that puppet Annan declare an end to Chinese occupation of US by mere paper declaration? But that only proves that Americans accepts the US occupation because most believe that different standards should apply to people, on the basis of race, ethnicity, nationality, and political orientations. And if the US occupation authority has stated that those 1000 Iraqi prisoners did not commit violent crimes, why were they incarcerated in the first place? The US does what it wants hoping that that not-observed deadline of the puppet constitutional process will be kept to help Bush's political fortunes. After reading the last article (see yesterday) by Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker, and having confirmed that the US government manipulated the results the last Iraqi elections, I now will consider that whatever government that came out of that "process" to be illegitimate, even if American manipulations and frauds did not succeed in bringing victory for former Saddam's henchman/car bomber/embezzler-in-Yemen/and former US chief puppet prime minister in Iraq. So Ibrahim Al-Ja`fari shall be officially called the puppet prime minister, holding the same dubious honor held by his predecessor. This does not mean that the Shi`ite parties would not have won in a really free election. They would have, and in much larger numbers, and `Allawi would have enjoyed less than 1%.