FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Taking Responsibility for Iraq

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.

BRIAN J. FOLEY is a professor at Florida Coastal School of Law. For some of his past articles, visit www.brianjfoley.com He can be reached at brian_j_foley@yahoo.com

 

 

 

More articles by:

Brian J. Foley is a lawyer and the author of A New Financial You in 28 Days! A 37-Day Plan (Gegensatz Press). Contact him at brian_j_foley@yahoo.com.

Weekend Edition
August 14, 2020
Friday - Sunday
Matthew Hoh
Lights! Camera! Kill! Hollywood, the Pentagon and Imperial Ambitions.
Joseph Grosso
Bloody Chicken: Inside the American Poultry Industry During the Time of COVID
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: It Had to be You
H. Bruce Franklin
August 12-22, 1945: Washington Starts the Korean and Vietnam Wars
Pete Dolack
Business as Usual Equals Many Extra Deaths from Global Warming
Paul Street
Whispers in the Asylum (Seven Days in August)
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Predatory Capitalism and the Nuclear Threat in the Age of Trump
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
‘Magical Thinking’ has Always Guided the US Role in Afghanistan
Ramzy Baroud
The Politics of War: What is Israel’s Endgame in Lebanon and Syria?
Ron Jacobs
It’s a Sick Country
Eve Ottenberg
Trump’s Plan: Gut Social Security, Bankrupt the States
Richard C. Gross
Trump’s Fake News
Jonathan Cook
How the Guardian Betrayed Not Only Corbyn But the Last Vestiges of British Democracy
Joseph Natoli
What Trump and the Republican Party Teach Us
Robert Fisk
Can Lebanon be Saved?
Brian Cloughley
Will Biden be Less Belligerent Than Trump?
Kenn Orphan
We Do Not Live in the World of Before
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
Compromise & the Status Quo
Andrew Bacevich
Biden Wins, Then What?
Thomas Klikauer – Nadine Campbell
The Criminology of Global Warming
Michael Welton
Toppled Monuments and the Struggle For Symbolic Space
Prabir Purkayastha
Why 5G is the First Stage of a Tech War Between the U.S. and China
Daniel Beaumont
The Reign of Error
Adrian Treves – John Laundré
Science Does Not Support the Claims About Grizzly Hunting, Lethal Removal
David Rosen
A Moment of Social Crisis: Recalling the 1970s
Maximilian Werner
Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf: Textual Manipulations in Anti-wolf Rhetoric
Pritha Chandra
Online Education and the Struggle over Disposable Time
Robert Koehler
Learning from the Hibakushas
Seth Sandronsky
Teaching in a Pandemic: an Interview With Mercedes K. Schneider
Dean Baker
Financing Drug Development: What the Pandemic Has Taught Us
Greta Anderson
Blaming Mexican Wolves for Livestock Kills
Evaggelos Vallianatos
The Meaning of the Battle of Salamis
Mel Gurtov
The World Bank’s Poverty Illusion
Paul Gilk
The Great Question
Rev. Susan K. Williams Smith
Trump Doesn’t Want Law and Order
Martin Cherniack
Neo-conservatism: The Seductive Lure of Lying About History
Nicky Reid
Pick a Cold War, Any Cold War!
George Wuerthner
Zombie Legislation: the Latest Misguided Wildfire Bill
Lee Camp
The Execution of Elephants and Americans
Christopher Brauchli
I Read the News Today, Oh Boy…
Tony McKenna
The Truth About Prince Philip
Louis Proyect
MarxMail 2.0
Sidney Miralao
Get Military Recruiters Out of Our High Schools
Jon Hochschartner
Okra of Time
David Yearsley
Bringing Landscapes to Life: the Music of Johann Christian Bach
FacebookTwitterRedditEmail