Pacific Free Press was launched in March 2007 by Dutch-Canadian Richard
Kastelein of V.O.F. Expathos, in the Netherlands along with Chris Cook- CFUV radio journalist and Editor in Chief of Pacific Free Press. Cook is based in , Victoria, British Columbia.
The mission of Pacific Free Press is simple: to dig out nuggets of truth from
the slag-heap of lies, ignorance and witless diversion that has buried
public discourse today. Pacific Free Press provides a new venue for
disseminating hard news and insightful, fact-based analysis of the
harsh realities too often ignored or distorted by the mainstream press.
Where are the Iraqis in the Iraq War?
by Ramzy Baroud
Five years after the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, mainstream media is once more making the topic an object of intense scrutiny. The costs and implications of the war are endlessly covered from all possible angles, with one notable exception -- the cost to the Iraqi people themselves.
Through all the special coverage and exclusive reports, very little is said about Iraqi casualties, who are either completely overlooked or hastily mentioned and whose numbers can only be guesstimated. Also conveniently ignored are the millions injured, internally and externally displaced, the victims of rape and kidnappings who will carry physical and psychological scars for the rest of their lives.
We find ourselves stuck in a hopeless paradigm, where it feels
necessary to empathise with the sensibilities of the aggressor so as
not to sound "unpatriotic", while remaining blind to the untold anguish
of the victims. Some actually feel the need to go so far as to blame
the Iraqis for their own misfortune. Both Democratic presidential
candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have expressed their wish
for Iraqis to take responsibility for the situation in their country,
with the former saying, "we cannot win their civil war. There is no
military solution."
It would have been helpful if Clinton had
reached her astute conclusion before she voted for the Senate's 2002
resolution authorising President Bush to attack Iraq. For the sake of
argument, let's overlook both Clinton's and Obama's repeated assertions
that all options, including military ones, are on the table regarding
how to "deal" with Iran's alleged ambition to acquire nuclear weapons.
But to go so far as blaming the ongoing war on the Iraqis' lack of
accountability is a new low for these "antiwar" candidates.
Is
it still a secret, five years on, that the war on Iraq was fought for
strategic reasons, to maintain a floundering superpower's control over
much of the world's energy supplies and to sustain the regional
supremacy of Israel, the US's most costly ally anywhere?
Of
course, there are those who prefer to imagine a world in which a
well-intentioned superpower would fight with all of its might to enable
another smaller, distant nation to enjoy the fruits of liberty,
democracy and freedom. But it is nothing short of ridiculous to pretend
that Iraqis are capable of controlling the parameters of the ranging
conflict, that a puppet government whose election and operation is
entirely under the command of the US military is capable of taking
charge and assuming responsibilities.
Equally absurd is the
insinuation that the civil war in Iraq is an exclusively Iraqi doing,
and that the US military has not deliberately planted the seeds of
divisions, hoping to reinterpret its role in Iraq from that of the
occupier to that of the arbitrator, making sure the "good" guys prevail
over the "bad".
The idea of the US making an immediate exit from
Iraq or taking full financial and legal responsibility for the
devastation and genocide -- yes, genocide -- that occurred in the last
five years is simply unthinkable from the viewpoint of the corporate US
media, which still relates to the war only in terms of American (and
never Iraqi) losses.
There are very few commentators who are
actually arguing that the reasons for war were entirely self-serving,
without an iota of morality behind them. Would Bush employ the same
logic he used to justify Saddam Hussein's execution -- suggesting this
was warranted by the Iraqi president's violence against his own people
-- when dealing with those responsible for the deaths of over a million
Iraqis as a result of this war?
And indeed Iraqis are dying in
numbers that never subside regardless of the media and official hype
about the "surge". Just Foreign Policy says the number of dead Iraqis
has surpassed one million, while a survey by the British polling agency
ORB estimates the number at over 1.2 million. But the plight of Iraqis
hardly ends at a death count, since those left behind endure untold
suffering: soaring poverty, unemployment rates between 40-70 per cent
(governmental estimates), total lack of security in major cities and,
according to Oxfam International, four million in need of emergency aid.
"Baghdad
has become the most dangerous city in the world, largely as a result of
a US policy of pitting various Iraqi ethnic and sectarian groups
against one another. Today, Baghdad is a city of walled-off Sunni and
Shia ghettoes, divided by concrete walls erected by the US military,"
reports Dahr Jamail, one of the few courageous voices that honestly
relayed the horrendous outcomes of the war.
Indeed, there seem
to be no promising statistics coming out of Iraq. Even under the
previous regime and the debilitating sanctions imposed by the US and
the UN, Iraqis were much better off prior to the war. Now, Iraqis are
relevant only as pawns of endless US government propaganda. From the
viewpoint of Bush, McCain and Cheney, they are the victims of Al-Qaeda,
which must be fought at all costs. From the viewpoint of Clinton and
Obama, they need to fight their own wars and take responsibility for
them, as if Iraqi "irresponsibility" is the main problem.
In yet
another "surprise visit" to Iraq by a US official, Vice-President Dick
Cheney declared that Iraq was a "successful endeavour". Considering the
exorbitant contracts granted to selected corporations, the war has
indeed succeeded in making a few already rich companies and individuals
a lot richer.
Meanwhile, Shlomo Brom, a senior fellow at Tel
Aviv University's Institute for National Security Studies and former
head of the Israeli army's Strategic Planning Division, sees things
from a slightly different angle. "Any Iraq will be better than Iraq
under Saddam, because the Iraq of Saddam had the ability to threaten
Israel," he was quoted as saying in the Christian Science Monitor.
In
considering such skewed logic, one can only hope that Cheney's
successful experiment will end soon, and that Israel's desire for
security is now sated. The people of Iraq cannot tolerate any more
"success".
Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an author and
editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His work has been published in many
newspapers and journals worldwide. His latest book is The Second
Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle (Pluto Press,
London).