Occupation: Blatant and Barbarous

Iraq is suffering under the heavy yoke of neo-colonialist occupation today. Perfectly sure that Baghdad had ceased to be a potent threat, the US and the British forces launched a vicious attack on Iraq. In less than a month they were able to occupy almost whole of Iraq. Like all invasions, the Anglo-US one is in brazen violation of international norms. The surprising thing, however, is that such a thing happened in our civilized time. Even more surprising is the fact that a whole country has been razed to ground and gulped down by neo-colonialist forces while the world remained by and large a mute witness. True, there have been public protests all over the world, newspaper editorials condemned the Anglo-US aggression in strongest words and community and religious leaders came out openly against this blatant invasion preventing the war from becoming a civilizational clash. The reality, however, is that Iraq is under occupation today.

Conducting a war is always an ugly and dirty business. This being a televised one, the ugly face of the war became even dirtier. We saw live the bombing to ashes of a whole civilization, the maiming of innocent children and the creation of a refugee problem. Before launching the “shock and awe” campaign, the Americans promised to the Iraqis and the world that their purpose was to create a new free Iraq where democracy would flourish for the wellbeing of one and all. Sooner than later the world will realize that these promises are as worthless as the dead paper they are written on.

Iraq was occupied by the British after World War One. During and after the war the British promised to the Iraqis about their right to self determination. But soon the Iraqis were to realize the hollowness of British promises and the fact that they were under occupation. In 1920 they rose in rebellion putting a great stress on Britain’s war budget. London, instead of accepting the genuine demands of the Iraqis decided to bomb them into submission; they even used mustard gas to silence the rebellious Iraqis. And on the political front they moved fast to rope in the services of the Hashimite family. Faisal, the second son of Sherif Husain who had sided with the British against the Turks, was brought to Iraq as King. A farcical election/referendum was conducted to give Faisal a 97% majority. Husni Mubarak’s frequent victory by more or less the same margin is thus an old “Arab practice” which the British had taught them.

The world will soon witness such a very sordid spectacle in today’s Iraq, specially if the Americans are able to establish themselves in the country. As in 1920s, today, too, the idea is to establish a puppet regime that would serve the Anglo-American interests.

But there is a significant difference between the two situations. During and after World War One the Iraqis were not as educated and aware as they are today. Moreover, the media was not as powerful as it appears today. The Iraqis seems to be aware of the changed circumstances, specially they appear to be realizing the powerful impact that the media can make on the world opinion. This is perhaps one of the reasons that the denizens of Baghdad have decided to take to the streets even before the dust of war settles down. The massive demonstration on Friday, the 18^th of April 2003 against the Americans bear testimony to the fact that the Iraqis are an aware and educated people and that they will make full use of the media in order to advance their cherished goal of independence.

What is the lesson of this war for the Arabs? Indeed all through the 20^th century they have been at the receiving end. The Palestinian plight continues unabated, and now this new tragedy of Iraq has been created for them. The Anglo-American alliance can advance any number of excuses or “arguments” for their brutal attack on Iraq. The reality, however, is that they did so because Iraq was weak both militarily and economically. Not only for the Arabs and Iraqis, the lesson for the entire third world is that in the present American-dominated world order the one and the only doctrine that matters is military and economic might. So, in order to preserve their independence, military, economic and political the third world, specially the oil-rich Persian/Arabian Gulf region, must try to become strong, for the Nature’s punishment for the weak, in the words of poet-philosopher Iqbal, is sudden death. This is the lesson that the fallen Saddam regime sends to the militarily and economically weak third world. Any takers?

[April, 2003]