Malcom Lagauche
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has not had a good month. Pressure is mounting daily for his ouster and also for the dismembering of Iraq.
U.S. politicians are openly calling for a change in the Iraqi leadership. They are not ambiguous. Democrat Senators Hilary Clinton and Carl Levin have been in the forefront of calling for al-Maliki’s ouster.
Al-Maliki has struck back. According to the article "Iraq PM Hits Out at Critics," published by Al-Jazeera News on August 26, 2007:
The Iraqi prime minister has replied to his U.S. and European critics by making criticisms of his own, including the ongoing killing of Iraqis by U.S. soldiers.
At a news conference in Baghdad on Sunday, Nuri al-Maliki singled out Hilary Rodham Clinton and Carl Levin, both Democratic senators, saying they should "come to their senses."
Al-Maliki said: "There are American officials who consider Iraq as if it were one of their villages, for example Hilary Clinton and Carl Levin." …
… Al-Maliki appeared stung by the recent series of critical statements about the government, including one from George Bush, the U.S. president, who said he was frustrated that al-Maliki had failed to make progress on political benchmarks.
In addition to the daily calls for al-Maliki’s demise, many pundits are calling for the dismembering of Iraq. Senator Joseph Biden has advocated the partitioning for years. Lately, he has spoken even louder on the subject.
For years, Ralph Peters, a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel, has been calling for the breakup of Iraq. In July 2003, he wrote: "The Iraq we’re trying to herd back together consists of three distinct nations caged under a single bloodstained flag."
It is in vogue for "experts" to knock the Iraqi people for not getting their act together in forming the "new democratic Iraq" that the U.S. supplied them. Now, everything is their fault. According to the sick and twisted logic of U.S. politicians, the U.S. did Iraq a favor and the Iraqis have not been forthcoming in thanking the Americans. "Our commitment is not open-ended" is the statement of the day.
The stooges in Baghdad who were put in power by the U.S. are now being threatened by their benefactors. It is unbelievable that they did not see this coming.
Prior to 2003, these quislings, mostly living outside Iraq, thought they would have a free ride in returning to their country of birth. How idiotic. All they had to do was look at the treatment of Iraq under Saddam to notice common themes: the U.S. treats all Iraqis as stupid, ignorant people who can not get along. No amount of counterattack is strong enough to change this ethnocentric behavior.
Subtle changes have occurred along the way, only to revert to the original assessment of Iraqis. Before March 2003, all Iraqis were bad. They were savage animals. Then, after the invasion, we started to see a few "good Iraqis" spring up.
For a while, there was propaganda that spoke of the differences between "good Iraqis" and "dead-enders." All that talk is gone now. To the U.S. government, and much of its citizenry, Iraqis are dysfunctional and ignorant. There is no longer a line dividing the good from the bad Iraqis.
Only a fool would not have seen the bigotry thrust on Iraq prior to the March 2003 invasion and not have concluded that this was Arabaphobia at its worst. The same cliches and statements used against Iraqis under the Ba’ath government are now used against Iraqis of all persuasions.
Even al-Maliki has seen that what was promised is not what was delivered. Despite all the bluster about Iraq now running its own affairs, the shots are called in Washington. If the U.S. administration wants al-Maliki out, he will be gone. There are many means available, including assassination. In the early 1960s, the president of South Vietnam was assassinated by CIA operatives. He had outlived his usefulness. Don’t count out assassination as a means of getting a new prime minister in Iraq.
A few months ago, al-Maliki publicly stated that U.S. troops were no longer needed in Iraq. Within 48 hours, he was in Washington, D.C. In front of the worldwide press corps, he emerged from a back room with George Bush. Al-Maliki’s head was pointing downward as he and Bush approached the podium. Bush then said there may have been a misunderstanding but all was well again. Al-Maliki was handed a piece of paper from which he read a statement in English proclaiming that U.S. troops should stay in Iraq indefinitely. He had experienced his trip to the woodshed.
Unless he is even a bigger fool than I thought, al-Maliki must realize that he and each and every Iraqi are nothing more than sand niggers to the U.S. government and public. He thought he was pulling a fast one on the people of Iraq, all the time assisting his new allies in Washington. In fact, he was used by the administration and is in the process of being chewed up and spit out.
The U.S. conned the Iraqi collaborators who assisted in bringing "democracy" and "freedom" to Iraq. Shortly before the bogus Iraqi elections of January 30, 2005, the American Forces Press Service published an article titled, "Upcoming Elections Represent 'Historic Moment,’ Iraqi Minister Says." According to the piece:
Iraq’s January 30 elections mark "the beginning of the end of miseries and difficulties that the people of Iraq have endured for so many decades," Iraq’s interim deputy prime minister told Pentagon reporters today during a videoconference from Baghdad.
Hindsight shows that the deputy prime minister (Barham Sali) was slightly off in his prediction.
Let me turn to a quote made by Dr. Abbas Khalaf, Saddam Hussein’s personal Russian/Arabic translator. On November 3, 2006, he was interviewed by CTV’s Moscow bureau. The subject of the interview was the current Iraq of violence and destruction compared to Iraq under Saddam Hussein. Khalaf stated:
You could agree or disagree with him, but now even those who were secretly against him are saying he understood us better than we understand ourselves.
Saddam Hussein had understood for years that the U.S. would eventually invade Iraq and try to destroy every aspect of the country that opposed U.S. hegemony. Al-Maliki should have taken notes when Saddam spoke. His assessment was not only for Ba’athist Iraq, but for any government Iraq would field in the future.
