Search This Blog

16 December, 2007

The Farce of Sovereignty in Iraq

America was scheduled to transfer “sovereignty” to Iraq on June 30, 2004. However, the US brought forward the date of transfer fearing large-scale violence. Paul Bremer left Iraq secretly, and surely in disgrace. He had come to give democracy and prosperity to the “liberated” Iraqis who had suffered under the yoke of Saddam’s dictatorship. However, he succeeded only in transferring the power to the hand-picked Anglo-American puppets many of whom have perhaps yet not surrendered their British or American passport.

Over 1.5 lakh American-dominated foreign forces are still in Iraq. And yet the US and the United Nations want us believe that Iraq is no longer under occupation. This American argument has impressed only some countries who were coerced to form the “coalition of the willing.” Even they are now either withdrawing or want to withdraw their forces on the ground that the occupation has ended and sovereignty has been transferred to the Iraqis.

The well-organized resistance forces have scored a number of successes in recent weeks. The Western, as well as ‘Westoxicated’ media describe them as terrorist and militant etc. Also they have come from the neighbouring countries or are getting support from outside the country. It is understandable that those who have occupied a country and enslaved its people would never accept the fact that the Iraqis have a right to fight for their freedom. And the people who fight against foreign occupation are freedom fighters and only the imperialists and their supporters would call them terrorist.

The Western and Westoxicated media shed crocodile’s tears on the loss of lives when the freedom fighters strike here or there. They have conveniently forgotten how many people the savage American bombardment killed during and after the war, a war that the US imposed on Iraq without any reason and without the support of the United Nations. They went in search of weapons of mass destruction which they have failed to find. And for this purpose they attacked Iraq and bombed Baghdad and other cities savagely and killed thousands of innocent people. Many more thousands have been wounded, maimed and paralyzed for life. Later on the Americans arrested large number of people and subjected them to the kinds of torture that even Saddam’s sons may not have imagined of. For a time the Western media highlighted the Abu Gharaib episode as it was essential to maintain its credibility.

But should we blame only the Western media for supporting America’s savage war on Iraq? Should we ignore what our “Westoxicated” media have done in the meanwhile. Haven’t they also called the Iraqi freedom fighters by such names as insurgents and terrorists and thus supported America’s neo-imperialism, at least indirectly?

Now let us keep aside the media coverage of Iraq and focus on the future of the battered country. The American and British forces are still in Iraq and no one knows for sure when they will leave the country. Surely the Anglo-American scheme is to have a pro-West government in Baghdad that would rule in the name of Iraq and its people but would serve the interests of its foreign masters. This much is abundantly clear to the Iraqis fighting against the American occupation of their country. It is also clear that the promised elections, scheduled to be held early next year, would neither be free nor fair. This is the reason that they have decided to continue their struggle against the puppet regime that the US has installed in Baghdad.

The Anglo-American scheme of having a puppet regime is dangerous for the entire world. It has not only brought Iraq on the verge of civil war but has also put a huge burden on weak economies through soaring oil prices. It is, therefore, essential for the third world countries to put pressure on America to pull its forces out of Iraq and let the UN work freely for installing a truly representative government in Baghdad that will function according to the aspirations of the people. The US has also to realize that its misadventure in Iraq has neither made it safer nor prosperous by few more dollars. The loss of face it has suffered has further alienated it in the comity of nations. But while it is easy to advise, one can not be sure if wisdom would dawn on present American leadership.

[July, 2004]

No comments: