|
November 8, 2003
Stravo
I know. Everyone says Iraq is not like Vietnam. I accept that.
But the feeling lingers. It is still looking pretty swampy terrain for the US. They do seem to be getting bogged down, Baghdad is a hostile city and Iraq is a divided nation regionally and religiously. Washington is faced with the choice between the risks of disorder due to the lack of troops and civil war if it arms Iraqis.
And the similarities? The US's uncritical faith in its overwhelming firepower, its modern equipment, mobility, and mastery of the skies. But war in Iraq, as in Vietnam will ultimately be won politically.
Meanwhile, the imperial president gives a stirring speech about freedom and democracy so shape public opinion in the US It announced changing the old practice of America's long-standing policy of tolerating corrupt and brutal Middle Eastern, pro-American autocrats in the name of realism and national security. Democracy was a secondary consideration.
Is that the kiss of death for Saudi Arabia? Not quite. Yesterday's corrupt autocracies are today's potential democracies for the imperial president:
"The Saudi government is taking first steps toward reform, including a plan for gradual introduction of elections. By giving the Saudi people a greater role in their own society, the Saudi government can demonstrate true leadership in the region."
What about those Arab societies that are actual democracies to the extent that they have a parliament with substantive budgetary and oversight powers and hold elections? Iran, it seems, is just not democratic enough for Washington:
"As changes come to the Middle Eastern region, those with power should ask themselves: Will they be remembered for resisting reform, or for leading it? In Iran, the demand for democracy is strong and broad, as we saw last month when thousands gathered to welcome home Shirin Ebadi, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The regime in Teheran must heed the democratic demands of the Iranian people, or lose its last claim to legitimacy."
Freedom and democracy huh. How come Saudi Arabia is a more legitimate regime in the eyes of Washington than Iran?
I accept that the Bush speech was about changing past practices and policies in the Middle East. But the hand of history weighs heavily here. It will take more than a neo-con speech about making the world better by bringing democracy to the Middle East to lift the weight of that colonial hand of history. The Europeans and Amercians created the Middle East, drew its borders and weaned and supported their grotesque dictators.
Since bringing democracy to the Middle East will bring the fundamental Islamists into power (ie., those whom the US has defined as the enemy), the imperial president's speech is about the credibility of America's military power and strategy.I would suggest that the US under the Bush administration is deeply unpopular in the Middle East. Apart from Israel, the populations of the nation-states would be hostile to the US military presence in the region.
|
Iran is not an Arab country.