What
You're Missing in Our Subscriber-only CounterPunch Newsletter
Special Investigation:
Have Journalist Been Deliberately Murdered in Iraq by the US
Military?
Our new
CounterPunch newsletter, just out, Christopher Reed examines
the growing body count of journalists in Iraq and documents numerous
incidents where US troops have deliberately targeted reporters.
Charles Glass offers a
stark comparison of the uprooting of Palestians in the Galilee
during the 1948 war to the lush compensation of Israeli's living
on the same land who were displaced by the war on Lebanon. Remember, we are funded
solely by the subscribers to the print edition of CounterPunch. Please support this
website by buying a
subscription to our newsletter, which contains fresh material you
won't find anywhere else, or by making a donation towards the
cost of this online edition. Remember contributions are tax-deductible.Click
here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please:Subscribe
Now
A theme regarding Iraq has emerged over
many months: that the "responsibility" for Iraq's future
lies in the hands of Iraqis and their neighbors. As the Iraqis
"stand up," the U.S. will "stand down." Iran
and Syria must stop fomenting violence and help build New Iraq.
Sounds sensible, especially
at first, especially when intoned by grave-sounding politicians.
But what about the U.S.? Didn't the U.S. cause the problem in
the first place? And isn't this all a bit like claiming (without
evidence) that you feel your neighbor is a threat to you, and
-- against the opinions and wisdom of most of your other neighbors,
and against the law -- smashing your way into his house, killing
his pregnant wife and son, and, after finding no evidence of
a threat, staying and burning his electricity and eating his
food? Then billing the man for the repairs, made by companies
chosen at your behest? And chastising him for failing to make
the house presentable for a party you've decided to throw for
your friends and calling him a "terrorist" when
he tries to kick you out?
With new friends like the U.S.,
does New Iraq need enemies?
It must not be forgotten, as
New Iraq falters, that what the U.S. invaded was a sovereign
nation. That there was no legitimate reason to invade. As Ron
Suskind shows in his book The
One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside America's Pursuit of Its Enemies
Since 9/11, the Bush Administration operated under a rubric
that if there was a at least a one percent chance that Iraq had
WMD, then that chance would be treated as a certainty. A more
irresponsible policy, given the stakes, given the predictions
of the horrendous events that a war could unleash, could not
be devised. That's the charitable view there's plenty
of evidence to suggest that the Bush Administration simply defrauded
us into the war.
Yet the president, his pom-pom
boys, and his slippery apologists act as if this mess is the
fault of the Iraqis, that somehow, since so many years have passed,
the Iraqis should (like the mythic, good American), brush off
the dust and blood and pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
So now it's OK for U.S. leaders to grow impatient with these
people. After all, we've given them a shot at democracy.
Of course, that's rubbish.
New Iraq never had a chance after the U.S. cratered it into
death and disorder. It's now accepted wisdom that the U.S.'s
disbanding of the Iraqi army was an idiotic move that fostered
this chaos -- the dangers were well-known but were ignored.
Now "The Decider"
is outsourcing his decision-making to the (unelected, unaccountable)
Iraq Study Group. This move is most likely not for new ideas,
but political cover. The president has barked so loudly that
he would "win" in Iraq, that now he must feel stuck;
leaving would look like flip-flopping, and, apparently, changing
one's mind (in the face of reality) is for losers. But if the
"realist" James Baker says it's time for young George
to pick up his toys and leave Iraq (three-plus years too late),
the president might listen.
The Iraq Study Group also gives
the Bush Administration cover to talk to Iraq's neighbors Syria
and Iran. The president has refused to speak to these countries
because he doesn't like what they're doing. News flash: Syria
and Iran are sovereign nations, and the U.S. is not a World Government.
The refusal to acknowledge this fact, or to try to force these
nations to change themselves into something that pleases the
Bush Administration, is infantile. It's time our leaders grew
up.
And when they do, they'll realize
that the solution to Iraq is straightforward: The U.S. and its
allies (accomplices) must pull out immediately. They must apologize
to the Iraqi people, to Iraq's neighbors (swarming with refugees),
and to the world. The war was an outrageous violation of international
law, and it was immoral. All U.S. and "coalition"
businesses must decamp no more no-bid, no-risk-of-loss
contracts for Halliburton and other FOBs (Friends of Bush).
Iraq's economy must be returned to the Iraqi people. (The "coalition"
signed a law in 2003 that opened Iraq to foreign investment (read:
ownership).) The U.S. and its accomplices must fund the reconstruction,
to be completed by whomever Iraqis choose to do it. The
U.S. and its accomplices must also compensate Iraqis for the
lives lost, the injuries caused, the lives interrupted and ruined.
There's a straightforward way
to describe this strategy. It's called standing up and taking
responsibility.
CounterPunch
Speakers Bureau Sick of sit-on-the-Fence speakers, tongue-tied and timid?
CounterPunch Editors Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St Clair
are available to speak forcefully on ALL the burning issues,
as are other CounterPunchers seasoned in stump oratory. Call
CounterPunch Speakers Bureau, 1-800-840-3683. Or email beckyg@counterpunch.org.
