Lessons from Iraq's civil war
Tuesday, 31 July 2007
Qazi Azad
PACIFISTS around the globe, irrespective of colour, creed and nationality, are terribly unhappy at the current state of world affairs. They find no prospect of an immediate end to the war of terror of the weak against the terrorising war on terror of the strong.
The combatants on both sides want a decisive win. But it would require them to achieve total liquidation or absolutely unconditional surrender of the other party. Hence the terror of either description is spreading.
After the attack on the Twin-Towers on 9.11 in New York, an all-out military attack was launched on Afghanistan to dislodge its Taliban government from power and find out al-Queda leader Osama bin Laden. It was done in the name of a war on terror. Numerous men, women and children perished when countless powerful bombs and missiles were dropped from air and fired from the sea by the mightier attackers. These pierced and fragmented them into body parts. It happened so not only in the frontal attacks, but also in so-called incidents of friendly fire when frightened invaders shot dead or fired missiles at innocent people. In some instances, loyal Afghan soldiers and police men also fell victim. If an angry mother earth had refused to soak the blood spilled, it would have formed a big lake. Only a devil with an iron heart could or would have loved to sail his yacht in that sea of human blood.
The war in Afghanistan in its present phase is an undeclared war. Officials in Kabul said on July 23 last that the US-led and Afghan government troops killed more than 75 Taliban men in two days of fierce fighting while six NATO soldiers died in separate clashes. An AFP report said the fighting erupted amid a renewed wave of violence, climaxed by a threat of the Talibans to kill 23 South Koreans and a German, held hostage by them.
A photograph, which accompanied the report in this paper on last Wednesday, showed a relative of the kidnapped Koreans weeping in Seoul after watching the TV news about the threat. A Korean was later killed and the German freed by their captors. Human tears at moments of sadness convey the same message in all places. It says the tormented in tears is aggrieved. It does represent a common character of mankind, a factor that should have been reckoned and constantly stressed on by all who matter within the national boundaries and on the global scene to promote unity in diversity. "What am I more than he?" ask yourself to feel the real urge to embrace the fellow next to you as your kin. If those who matter can always retain this humane feeling, there is no need for a war of terror or a war on terror.
Animosity between man and man is either a product of greed -- the nasty impetus that leads one to take away or to try to take away the legitimate rights of the other, or an outcome of unhealthy domination. The reactions to such acts provoke retaliation exposing that flesh and blood cannot endure insults. It is true not only in case of human beings but it is also true for every living being in the animal kingdom. Why should a man claim to be a rational animal and claim superiority over other animals if he cannot distinguish himself from the rest of the living animals in the animal kingdom by holding his greed and tendency to dominate other human beings in check?
Equality being the foremost democratic value, no democrat, worth the name, should prefer to negotiate peace on an unfair and irrational basis to settle a dispute. 'Peace on my term' cannot be the claim of a democrat. Nor does it uphold his respect for equality. Nor does it help achieve peace. That is the lesson at least from war-ravaged Iraq, if not from Afghanistan.
Both US President George Bush and Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who lives and holds office in the American military protected fortified green zone of Baghdad, isolated from the ordinary Iraqis whom he is supposed to represent and lead, should appreciate it. George Bush should confess, for the sake of peace, that he committed a grave mistake by attacking Iraq for allegedly possessing weapons of mass destruction. Nuri al-Maliki should abdicate to become an equal among equals recognising that the Iraqis do not want him as their leader. His stay and holding office in the green zone should tell him that he relies on guns rather than on public acceptance. How can he govern and establish democracy from a position of isolation in war-ravaged Iraq, now being torn apart by a raging civil war?
According to another AFP report, in the tri-partite talks on security in Iraq among his government delegation and the US and Iranian representatives, held last week in Baghdad's isolated green zone, Prime Minister Maliki said, "We do not want to see Iraq interfering in the affairs of others, nor do we want anyone to interfere in its internal affairs". If he meant what he said Mr. Maliki should first withdraw from the green zone and then ask all foreign troops including the Americans to leave his country forthwith. He should take full charge of the country and its people to prove that he is their leader. He should not rely, like an imposter, on foreign forces to help him to establish his control on the country.
Iraq's terrorism is basically a problem of intense inter-community hatred and distrust, built up during the long misrule of late Saddam Hossain and the subsequent inter-sect rivalry and riots. The solution to its raging civil war lies in national reconciliation. Prime Minister Maliki who lives in the safe enclave of the American protected green zone, reminds about Cambodia's unsuccessful leaders who were alternatively on catwalks in the country to check its unfolding revolution of early 1970s. He is not the man to succeed in achieving national reconciliation.
Although President Bush is not appreciating the realities of the Iraqi situation, the Americans have begun to realise it. The war in Iraq, which was launched by unelected President George Bush in 2003, though helped him to win the presidency for his second term with his popularity rating soared to 90 per cent immediately after the attack, has lately dented his public image seriously in the US. He is now one of the least popular presidents of his country.
While about 4000 American soldiers have lost their lives in this war, the realities on ground leave no room to hope that the civil war is anywhere near its end. Majority Americans want their soldiers to be withdrawn. They include even some promising presidential candidates like Hillary Clinton who told her fellow countrymen the other day in course of a TV debate that she would not like to see more American soldiers and Iraqis killed in Iraq. She wants immediate phase-wise withdrawal of US troops.
The nose-diving of George Bush's popularity to below 30 per cent speaks about the American mind on Iraq war, which has turned into a fierce civil war with continuing insults and killings of one side feeding reprisals from the other side. A cycle of atrocities from both sides seems to have become the norm.
The Americans ought to appreciate the high thermal state of anti-US feelings in Iraq and do exactly what would help reverse it, blurring the memories of the illogical war from the Iraqi mind. They should impeach George Bush for repeatedly lying with them on the Iraq issue and thus shattering America's moral standing as a world leader.
If Nuri al-Maliki has realised that he is too small to pacify an angry Iraq, he should follow the foot-print of any of Combodia's leaders prior to the communist take-over who fled to the US and fly to the country for a permanent job.
PACIFISTS around the globe, irrespective of colour, creed and nationality, are terribly unhappy at the current state of world affairs. They find no prospect of an immediate end to the war of terror of the weak against the terrorising war on terror of the strong.
The combatants on both sides want a decisive win. But it would require them to achieve total liquidation or absolutely unconditional surrender of the other party. Hence the terror of either description is spreading.
After the attack on the Twin-Towers on 9.11 in New York, an all-out military attack was launched on Afghanistan to dislodge its Taliban government from power and find out al-Queda leader Osama bin Laden. It was done in the name of a war on terror. Numerous men, women and children perished when countless powerful bombs and missiles were dropped from air and fired from the sea by the mightier attackers. These pierced and fragmented them into body parts. It happened so not only in the frontal attacks, but also in so-called incidents of friendly fire when frightened invaders shot dead or fired missiles at innocent people. In some instances, loyal Afghan soldiers and police men also fell victim. If an angry mother earth had refused to soak the blood spilled, it would have formed a big lake. Only a devil with an iron heart could or would have loved to sail his yacht in that sea of human blood.
The war in Afghanistan in its present phase is an undeclared war. Officials in Kabul said on July 23 last that the US-led and Afghan government troops killed more than 75 Taliban men in two days of fierce fighting while six NATO soldiers died in separate clashes. An AFP report said the fighting erupted amid a renewed wave of violence, climaxed by a threat of the Talibans to kill 23 South Koreans and a German, held hostage by them.
A photograph, which accompanied the report in this paper on last Wednesday, showed a relative of the kidnapped Koreans weeping in Seoul after watching the TV news about the threat. A Korean was later killed and the German freed by their captors. Human tears at moments of sadness convey the same message in all places. It says the tormented in tears is aggrieved. It does represent a common character of mankind, a factor that should have been reckoned and constantly stressed on by all who matter within the national boundaries and on the global scene to promote unity in diversity. "What am I more than he?" ask yourself to feel the real urge to embrace the fellow next to you as your kin. If those who matter can always retain this humane feeling, there is no need for a war of terror or a war on terror.
Animosity between man and man is either a product of greed -- the nasty impetus that leads one to take away or to try to take away the legitimate rights of the other, or an outcome of unhealthy domination. The reactions to such acts provoke retaliation exposing that flesh and blood cannot endure insults. It is true not only in case of human beings but it is also true for every living being in the animal kingdom. Why should a man claim to be a rational animal and claim superiority over other animals if he cannot distinguish himself from the rest of the living animals in the animal kingdom by holding his greed and tendency to dominate other human beings in check?
Equality being the foremost democratic value, no democrat, worth the name, should prefer to negotiate peace on an unfair and irrational basis to settle a dispute. 'Peace on my term' cannot be the claim of a democrat. Nor does it uphold his respect for equality. Nor does it help achieve peace. That is the lesson at least from war-ravaged Iraq, if not from Afghanistan.
Both US President George Bush and Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, who lives and holds office in the American military protected fortified green zone of Baghdad, isolated from the ordinary Iraqis whom he is supposed to represent and lead, should appreciate it. George Bush should confess, for the sake of peace, that he committed a grave mistake by attacking Iraq for allegedly possessing weapons of mass destruction. Nuri al-Maliki should abdicate to become an equal among equals recognising that the Iraqis do not want him as their leader. His stay and holding office in the green zone should tell him that he relies on guns rather than on public acceptance. How can he govern and establish democracy from a position of isolation in war-ravaged Iraq, now being torn apart by a raging civil war?
According to another AFP report, in the tri-partite talks on security in Iraq among his government delegation and the US and Iranian representatives, held last week in Baghdad's isolated green zone, Prime Minister Maliki said, "We do not want to see Iraq interfering in the affairs of others, nor do we want anyone to interfere in its internal affairs". If he meant what he said Mr. Maliki should first withdraw from the green zone and then ask all foreign troops including the Americans to leave his country forthwith. He should take full charge of the country and its people to prove that he is their leader. He should not rely, like an imposter, on foreign forces to help him to establish his control on the country.
Iraq's terrorism is basically a problem of intense inter-community hatred and distrust, built up during the long misrule of late Saddam Hossain and the subsequent inter-sect rivalry and riots. The solution to its raging civil war lies in national reconciliation. Prime Minister Maliki who lives in the safe enclave of the American protected green zone, reminds about Cambodia's unsuccessful leaders who were alternatively on catwalks in the country to check its unfolding revolution of early 1970s. He is not the man to succeed in achieving national reconciliation.
Although President Bush is not appreciating the realities of the Iraqi situation, the Americans have begun to realise it. The war in Iraq, which was launched by unelected President George Bush in 2003, though helped him to win the presidency for his second term with his popularity rating soared to 90 per cent immediately after the attack, has lately dented his public image seriously in the US. He is now one of the least popular presidents of his country.
While about 4000 American soldiers have lost their lives in this war, the realities on ground leave no room to hope that the civil war is anywhere near its end. Majority Americans want their soldiers to be withdrawn. They include even some promising presidential candidates like Hillary Clinton who told her fellow countrymen the other day in course of a TV debate that she would not like to see more American soldiers and Iraqis killed in Iraq. She wants immediate phase-wise withdrawal of US troops.
The nose-diving of George Bush's popularity to below 30 per cent speaks about the American mind on Iraq war, which has turned into a fierce civil war with continuing insults and killings of one side feeding reprisals from the other side. A cycle of atrocities from both sides seems to have become the norm.
The Americans ought to appreciate the high thermal state of anti-US feelings in Iraq and do exactly what would help reverse it, blurring the memories of the illogical war from the Iraqi mind. They should impeach George Bush for repeatedly lying with them on the Iraq issue and thus shattering America's moral standing as a world leader.
If Nuri al-Maliki has realised that he is too small to pacify an angry Iraq, he should follow the foot-print of any of Combodia's leaders prior to the communist take-over who fled to the US and fly to the country for a permanent job.