OVER THERE

by Michael Hammerschlag

Lately, I’ve been considering whether Bush’s fourth justification for the Iraq War: we are fighting them there so they won’t come here isn’t completely without merit. After all, there have, incredibly, been no attacks in America since 9-11. And creating a theme park for jihadists in Iraq certainly has kept them occupied. It was brought home to me by a friend in Hawaii. “I believe that. Hey, I’m a lifelong Democrat. But there haven’t been any attacks here.” Again and again this is mentioned by US troops as the rationale for their struggle and suffering, and it seems logical.

But it breaks down on closer examination. First, there’s the madness of creating a vicious insurgent war in a place that didn’t have one. No matter how many times Bush and the neocons say so, there were no terrorists directed at America in Iraq before the invasion*, until we invaded and created them. Perhaps Iraq has functioned as a gigantic bug zapper for jihadi mosquitoes- where were the suicide bomber when Saddam reigned?- but most fanatics are home grown. Was it really worth the immense price in lives and treasure? The Arabs who flocked to fight the good fight in Iraq weren’t planning or able to mount attacks on America. Maybe in Iraq, they will get the training to do so: a prison university for criminals, except it’s Al Qaida training terrorists.

There was a fierce fire in Afghanistan, but lacking much fuel in population or fervor. Special Forces and CIA brilliantly extinguished the fire by routing the Taliban and their Qaida colleagues in record time, but glowing pockets persisted in hideouts. Rather than keep spreading foam on the coals of Islamic grievance and paranoia as we hunted OBL and his minions, George Bush 2 found an immense stand of old growth sequoias and redwoods a thousand miles away and torched them, creating a conflagration that seems to be growing exponentially. The forest there was carpeted by hundreds of years of kindling and deadwood in the hatreds, oppressions, and murders between religious, tribal, and ethnic factions. But fighting terrorism is about extinguishing the maniacs who started fires and their handiwork, not starting a monstrous blaze in a stable and quiet backwater.

The miserably named “war on terrorism” has always been partly a struggle for minds- which we’ve been losing at the speed of light. From failing to lift a finger to control the Palestinian Israeli conflict, to talk of crusades, to invading Iraq based on nonexistent WMD’s, this administration has been Bin Laden’s best recruiting tool. International Arab television has ensured that the graphic suffering of the Iraqis (and Palestinians) has been beamed to 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide. For every terrorist we kill or capture in Iraq, we are generating dozens or hundreds in Pakistan or Egypt, Saudi Arabia or Indonesia, which makes this the most counterproductive war in our history. So, we aren’t just removing the suicidal terrorists, we are breeding them, by fueling their obsession with persecution by sitting astride the Vatican of the Shia faith.. and the heart of the Arab world. They don’t hate us because of our freedom, but because of our actions.

The courage of Iraqis in defying the nihilistic killers by voting is heartening, but I fear that Sunni disenfranchisement (only 2% of assembly) will lead to a civil war- soon. As the Shiites take control, they are likely to react in savage fashion to the Sunni terrorism, especially when they go after the Shiite Mullahs and mosques. 83 years of being treated like animals will resurface. And no matter how much we mouth the word freedom, how free can people be when they can’t walk out the door, and most are nostalgic for Saddam’s safety. It’s almost heartbreaking to hear our troops simplistically celebrate the election, but by their sacrifice, help install the Shiite Mullahs that have been the bane of our existence in Iran. Muqtada Al Sadr didn’t stop the violence because he saw the light, but because democracy was soon going to hand him the keys to the kingdom.

Now Bush wants to deal with the long smoldering flames in Iran, a clear and present danger risen to white hot with their real massive nuclear program- what we should have confronted rather than Iraq. But the squandering of our wealth, resources, integrity, and good will in Iraq; will make that difficult or impossible.

* Ansar al-Islam was a fanatical group on the Iran border loosely allied with Al Qaida and formed after 9-11, but they were warring against the Kurds, who had great incentives to exaggerate connections and support by Saddam and Osama; Eradicated in beginning of war. Saddam also supported terrorism in Israel by paying bounties to suicide bombers’ families

Michael Hammerschlag's commentary and articles (http://HAMMERNEWS.com) have appeared in Seattle Times, Providence. Journal, Columbia Journalism Review, Hawaii Advertiser, Capital Times, MediaChannel; and Moscow News, Tribune, Times, and Guardian. He's been a TV reporter, foreign correspondent, and produced documentaries over 25 years. He spent 2 years in Russia as the empire collapsed, reported on Dean’s savaging by the media, and had the first big scoop on all the media mistakes on Election Night 2000 hammerschlag@bigfoot.com

--Baghdad: from riverbend Feb 18, 95

“And is Iran so bad?” He finally asked. Well no, Abu Ammar, I wanted to answer, it’s not bad for *you* - you’re a man… if anything your right to several temporary marriages, a few permanent ones and the right to subdue females will increase. Why should it be so bad? Instead I was silent. It’s not a good thing to criticize Iran these days. I numbly reached for the bags he handed me, trying to rise out of that sinking feeling that overwhelmed me when the results were first made public.

It’s not about a Sunni government or a Shia government- it’s about the possibility of an Iranian-modeled Iraq. Many Shia are also appalled with the results of the elections. There’s talk of Sunnis being marginalized by the elections but that isn’t the situation. It’s not just Sunnis- it’s moderate Shia and secular people in general who have been marginalized.

The list is frightening- Da’awa, SCIRI, Chalabi, Hussein Shahristani and a whole collection of pro-Iran political figures and clerics. They are going to have a primary role in writing the new constitution. There’s talk of Shari’a, or Islamic law, having a very primary role in the new constitution. The problem is, whose Shari’a? Shari’a for many Shia differs from that of Sunni Shari’a. And what about all the other religions? What about Christians and Mendiyeen?

Is anyone surprised that the same people who came along with the Americans – the same puppets who all had a go at the presidency last year – are the ones who came out on top in the elections? Jaffari, Talbani, Barazani, Hakim, Allawi, Chalabi… exiles, convicted criminals and war lords. Welcome to the new Iraq.

Ibraheim Al-Jaffari, the head of the pro-Iran Da’awa party gave an interview the other day. He tried very hard to pretend he was open-minded and that he wasn’t going to turn the once-secular Iraq into a fundamentalist Shia state but the fact of the matter remains that he is the head of the Da’awa party. The same party that was responsible for some of the most infamous explosions and assassinations in Iraq during the last few decades. This is the same party that calls for an Islamic Republic modeled like Iran. Most of its members have spent a substantial amount of time in Iran.

Jaffari cannot separate himself from the ideology of his party.

Then there’s Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). He got to be puppet president for the month of December and what was the first thing he did? He decided overburdened, indebted Iraq owed Iran 100 billion dollars. What was the second thing he did? He tried to have the “personal status” laws that protect individuals (and especially women) eradicated.

They try to give impressive interviews to western press but the situation is wholly different on the inside. Women feel it the most. There’s an almost constant pressure in Baghdad from these parties for women to cover up what little they have showing. There’s a pressure in many colleges for the segregation of males and females. There are the threats, and the printed and verbal warnings, and sometimes we hear of attacks or insults.

You feel it all around you. It begins slowly and almost insidiously. You stop wearing slacks or jeans or skirts that show any leg because you don’t want to be stopped in the street and lectured by someone who doesn’t approve. You stop wearing short sleeves and start preferring wider shirts with a collar that will cover up some of you neck. You stop letting your hair flow because you don’t want to attract attention to it