If it weren't for Internet access to
troops, expatriates and Iraqis in Iraq, you would think that coalition
military operations in Iraq were a major disaster, and that prompt
withdrawal was the only reasonable course of action. But the mass media
view of the situation is largely fiction, conjured up in editorial
offices outside Iraq, with foreign reporters in Iraq (most of them
rarely leaving their heavily guarded hotels) providing color
commentary, and not much else. So what do the troops and Iraqis say?
First,
there is definitely a terrorism problem. Not an insurgency, not a
guerilla war, not a resistance. A portion of the Sunni Arab population
refuses to recognize the Sunni Arab loss of power in early 2003. They
are supporting a campaign of terror to either get back power or, more
pragmatically, to get immunity for most Sunni Arabs for crimes
committed during Saddams decades in power. The majority of support the
terrorists get is from the amnesty crowd. Hundreds of thousands of
Sunni Arab families have one or more members who did Saddam's dirty
work. That has left millions of Kurds and Shia Arabs looking for
revenge. Remember, this is where the legal concept of "eye-for-an-eye"
was invented thousands of years ago. The children of Hammurabi want
their measure of vengeance, and if they get it, the current violence in
Iraq will look pallid by comparison. All the prevents a wholesale
descent into mutual slaughter is the presence of coalition troops. In
other parts of the world (and there are many to examine at the moment)
this sort of thing is called peacekeeping. Withdraw the peacekeepers,
and what peace there is goes with them.
Second, there is
a cultural crises, in the Arab world in particular, and the Moslem
world in general. The crises is expressed by a lack of economic,
educational and political performance. By whatever measure you wish to
use, Nobel prizes, patents awarded, GDP growth, the Arabs have fallen
behind the rest of the world. Part of the problem is the Arab tendency
to blame outsiders, and to avoid taking responsibility. Tolerating
tyranny and resistance to change doesn't help either. That is changing,
and the war in Iraq has become the center of this cultural battle. It
began with the 2003 invasion, which was reported by the Arab media as a
great defeat for the Western "crusader" army. Until, that is, it was
all too obvious that American troops had battled their way to Baghdad
in three weeks, and were quickly defeating Iraqi forced defending this
cultural capital of the Arab world. This triggered a debate in the Arab
world, one that got little coverage in the West. It began when some
Arab journalists openly pointed out, in the Arab media, that Arab
reporters had not only been writing fantastical stories that had no
relationship to reality, but that this sort of thing had been going on
for a long time and, gosh, maybe it had something to do with the sorry
state of affairs in the Arab world. That particular debate is still
going on, largely unnoticed in the West. This is the real war against
terrorism, because the terrorists represent the forces of repression
and backwardness in the Arab world.
Third, the bad guys
are really, really bad, but they have many prominent allies around the
world. Most Iraqis cannot understand how so many media outlets in the
West can keep giving favorable coverage to the Sunni Arab terrorists.
These guys are butchers, and many used to work for Saddam, committing
the same kind of mayhem. Yet these European reporters come looking for
Sunni Arab "victims" of "American imperialism." How strange is that?
Nothing strange, just another cultural quirk. The Europeans are much
more risk averse than Americans. We all remember the 1930s, where most
of Europe left Hitler alone, hoping that they could talk sense into
him, or that he would go away. Eventually, the good people of Europe
(at least those that had not been conquered by the Germans) had to
fight the nazis. Americans, most of them descendents of refugees from
European foolishness, wanted no part of this latest chapter. But the
Japanese and Pearl Harbor intervened, and there we were. After that,
Europeans had to deal with another of their inventions, communism. This
one had also started off in a promising fashion, but had eventually
descended into mass murder and tyranny. Still, many Europeans remained
fans, at least from a distance, and defended it until communism
collapsed in a pile of contradictions and dead ideas. Europeans have a
thing about tyranny. While not wanting it for themselves, they are more
willing than most to tolerate it for others. Thus the disagreement over
going after Saddam. Many Europeans believe that taking down Saddam was
just wrong, and continued American peacekeeping in Iraq just compounds
the error. Europeans had made their peace,