|
|
Blog Feeds
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland
Lockdown Skeptics
|
Watching anti-war protests with pain national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Thursday March 13, 2003 06:16 by Bigfoot
 By Adil Awadh. Adil Awadh, an Iraqi doctor, worked in a military hospital in Iraq from 1994 to 1996. He is an independent member of the Iraqi National Congress and lives in the Washington area. Published March 9, 2003. As an Iraqi refugee who has experienced firsthand the horrors of Saddam Hussein's despotic reign in Iraq, it's difficult for me to watch hundreds of thousands of people marching in the streets of America and Europe voicing their disapproval of the war plans to liberate my besieged homeland. As I watch these images roll across my TV screen, I wonder how these protests appear to various audiences in Iraq. I wonder how much pain these rallies cause those Iraqis whose tongues were mercilessly cut off by Hussein because they chose to exercise that same right of free speech in Baghdad. I wondered how these defiant protest chants sound to the hundreds of victims of Hussein's barbaric ear-cutting policies, for they too were opposed to the concept of war, especially those involving Hussein. I have treated many Iraqi soldiers and brave anti-war activists suffering from severe ear infections with life-threatening consequences, after being subjected to this perverse form of mutilation at the Al-Amarah military hospital. I was a medical intern at the hospital, located in the southern part of Iraq from 1994 until 1996, and was a sad witness to this atrocity. I find it unfortunate and ironic that a Western anti-war activist would march in support of Hussein and his war-inflicting regime while their brave anti-war Iraqi counterparts languish tortured and mutilated in the dark jails of Saddam Hussein. I wondered how the protest banners carried by the marchers appear to Iraqis who have long been subjected to leafleting by Iraq's "Great Uncle." In 1991, my family was the terrified recipient of one such chilling message when Hussein's military helicopters dropped leaflets informing the residents of my town that the Iraqi military was about to strike us with chemical weapons. We were told the action was necessary in an effort to quell the popular and widespread anti-Hussein uprising. One of these leaflets fell in my family's garden. I can only imagine the horror my family and the residents of my town must have felt when they read the signs of the anti-war protesters asking their leaders to extend the reign of the Butcher of Baghdad. As I reflect on how these images will play back home, I recall several other aspects of life in Hussein's besieged Iraq. Those who have lived in this prison of a country, this sorry excuse of a defiant Arab state, have too many stories and scars to recall. I remembered the bizarre episode of witnessing medical students being asked to volunteer for suicide kamakazi-style missions in a futile response to the crippling allied air assault of the Gulf War. I remember the students not only refusing to volunteer, but joking about the irony of the fact that they were studying medicine to relieve pain and suffering and were now being asked to volunteer to inflict pain and suffering. For the past 30 years the world has kept silent regarding the atrocities endured by the besieged people of Iraq at the hands of Hussein. For too long, the Iraqi people have cried for help but the world has played deaf. It is a sad reflection on the state of appreciation for universal human rights when, finally, the Bush and the British administrations seem to have heard these cries, yet hundreds of thousands of people worldwide marched in the streets to block any attempt to save the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator. For me the best response to those protesters is for the free world, led by the U.S, to liberate Iraq. The people of Iraq will certainly welcome any international power that will join the battle with them against Hussein's warmongering regime. I know, I witnessed it firsthand. During the widespread Iraqi uprising of March 1991, Iraqis welcomed the victorious allied forces and took up arms against the totalitarian regime of Hussein. In a matter of a few days, 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces were under the complete control of the free people of Iraq. Sadly, the world community shunned the people of Iraq in 1991 in much the same manner as that of today's anti-war protesters. One thing that I can surely predict is that if this historic opportunity of removing the regime in Baghdad is lost, the Iraqi people will be in more pain. The barbaric atrocities will prevail and more ears, tongues and heads will be cut. Instead of just dropping leaflets warning of a chemical strike, an emboldened Saddam Hussein will use real chemical weapons, as he has done before. For this time, Hussein will know the world lacks the resolve and the humanitarian spirit required to take the steps necessary to remove him from his self-anointed and blood-stained throne. But, despite all, I remain an optimist. I believe that when the Iraqis get their freedom, they will march on Iraqi streets lifting the placards that say "Thank you America and United Kingdom." And I can certainly foretell another placard that will boldly declare "French and Germans, you can't inspect evil." However, the marchers in Iraq will never be able to exercise this very basic human right of demonstration, should the regime of Saddam Hussein remain in power. Sadly, the anti-war demonstrators desire exactly that end.
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (14 of 14)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14The writer is at best, confused and naive, and quite possibly the item is a "plant". If indeed it is soldiers and anti-war activists who are having their ears cut off, this proves there is a real chance of a nonmilitary resolution from within Iraq.
As for placing one's hopes in "the free world, led by America", give us a break!
Out of the frying pan into the fire.
The reality is that some Iraqi exiles see US invasion as a chance for them to become the new government. This is hardly new, remember when the Russians invaded Czechlovaka in 1968 they were also able to wave the 'invite' of some Czech workers as their excuse. And Hitler also invaded Czechlovakia at the invite of some Czech citizens (of Germen descent). It would be more unusual if the US were unable to dig up any Iraqi exiles to support their invasion plans.
Other Iraqi exile groups, including those on the revolutionary left, oppose the war and see US invasion as just introducing a new form of dictatorship. These groups know exactly how nasty Saddam is because they have been on the receiving end of his methods for decades - but they also know war offers no solution to the problems ofthe Iraqi people. I've some links to one of these at the page below.
The US has been funding and giving PR training to pro invasion exile groups for some months now. They are also given exile to the media. But even some of these are having second thoughts after seeing what the US is planning for a post-Saddam Iraq.
It is the anti-war protestors who are confused and naive. They are led up the garden path and then left there by virtually any sob story that fits in with their prejudices. I would hate to go buying a used car with an anti-war protestor along to advise me.
Too true Andrew.
The Romaninas freed themselves from Chausescu, a dictator every bit as bad as Saddam, without any external help being offered.
Similarly, the South Africans toppled the evil apartheid regieme without any help from foreigners.
The Venezuelan people toppled a US backed coup in 2002 without any external help.
etc. etc.
I suggest that this is the best option for the Iraqi people as they will be assured self-determination and control over their own destiny and natural resources.
Contrary to what the US/K would have us believe there are no quick-fix solutions to the worlds problems, and their strike-first tactics borrow heavily from Israeli military strategy ... and look where that got them.
No to US/K military/economic expansionism, yes to an Iraqi peoples revolution at the time of their choosing with whatever government they choose to follow!
Andrew right on exile Iraqis.
Avi till you write anything which is free of histrionic appeal to emotions or is simply dismissive of others I can not take you seriously which is a pity, you do have something to say no?
Monkeys of the US empire
No-one questions the barbarity of the current regime in Iraq. I've met victims, and families of victims.
What concerns me is that the US and UK don't speak of 'Democratising' Iraq. Their goal is Regime Change - remove the current one, install a different one.
With years of experience working in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Oman, I can assure him that the Iraqi people would have nothing to look forward to under a US/UK sponsored regime.
I've met and helped torture victims in the Sultanate of Oman, widely believed to be the most liberal regime in the Gulf. As everyone will tell you, women can drive, you can buy booze and...and..and.. That's freedom, isn't it?
But mention one word against the Sultan, and you get it in the neck. Sometimes literally. At the least, you'll have the Internal Security Service on your neck for months or years. Want a job in the public service but want to ask questions as well? Forget it.
The wonderful peoples of the Middle East will never allowed to be at peace - the US, UK and others will always benefit from turmoil there. Do you think Turkey or Iran would be happy if the Kurds became a free nation with their own government? Turkey is waiting to 'handle' the Kurdish problem. They are just as likely to remove your tongue- at the neck, as Saddam's regime, especially if you're a Kurd.
I've personally known UK and US secret service people working within business and state security in Oman. You can trust them. To look after the interests of their own countries, that is.
I sat with US pilots around the pool at the Al Mansoor Melia hotel in Bahgdad - they had been shipping in the gases, missiles and other components that the US was happy to supply to their bosom pal Saddam, (that was 1987).
I wish I were wrong. We know all about Western involvement across the globe. The West will do what suits it best, and tough on those who suffer. Token freedom perhaps, but the Iraqis, like us, get only one life. They are entitled to enjoy the full benefits of a proper human existence.
This war must be stopped.
PPS
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4477501,00.html
------------
http://myleadnet.lead.org/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=18&threadid=463
------------
Anti-war protesters will soon have lots and lots of egg on their faces when the ordinary Iraqi people hail the US and Brits as liberators from one of the world's most evil tyrants. They will be that country's heroes. Particularly grateful will be the Marsh Arabs, who Saddam tried to wipe out altogether, in nothing less than genocide. Basically, ordinary Iraqis couldn't give a sod about political correctness and all the other left-wing claptrap: they just want freedom from obscene tyranny, good health and the chance to make a decent living. It's the US and the Brits they're going to get it from. Of course, once this happens then a lot of anti-war protesters are going to want to forget that episode of their lives and will be saying that they were secretly for the war all along. Yeah, right...
In a Guardian article by Jonathan Steele, the question of Iraqi exile “opinion” is addressed. He seeks to point out that the pro-war lobby have seized upon selected exiles to support the case for a war and to undermine support of the anti-war movement. The lead article on this post has all the classic elements of an emotive assault on anti-war protestors….
“I find it unfortunate and ironic that a Western anti-war activist would march in support of Hussein and his war-inflicting regime while their brave anti-war Iraqi counterparts languish tortured and mutilated in the dark jails of Saddam Hussein.”
I know of no-one who marched in support of Saddam Hussein and find it “ironic and unfortunate” that anyone should be so naďve as to believe that, or cynical enough to imply it. Then we get,
“hundreds of thousands of people worldwide marched in the streets to block any attempt to save the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator.”
Deliberately undermines the huge groundswell of public opinion on Feb 15th and again purposely seeks to misinterpret the aims of the anti-war protests.
The letter praises the “victorious allied forces” of 1991 and then opines that when the Iraqi people rose up against Saddam “the world community shunned the people of Iraq in 1991 in much the same manner as that of today's anti-war protesters.” Hold on a minute, wasn’t it the commander-in-chief of the same “victorious allied forces” who exhorted the Iraqi people to rise up and then allowed Saddam’s forces to pass US lines and butcher them in their thousands?
The letter then continues to equate anti-war to pro-Saddam again and again. Maybe the letter and it’s entiments are heartfelt, but the right-wing media produce articles like this letter as representative of the majority opinion of Iraqi exiles. But, as ever, things are not that simple. From the Jonathan Steele article:-
“A large number of Iraqis were among the million-member throng, including two key independent political groups. They carried banners denouncing Saddam Hussein (thereby echoing the sentiments of many non-Iraqis since this was not a protest by pro-Saddam patsies, as the pro-war people also falsely claim). They represented important currents in the Iraqi opposition, and ones whom the Americans have repeatedly tried to persuade to join the exiles' liaison committee.”
Da'wa, Iraq's moderate Islamic party are opposed to the war and have declined to become involved in the Iraqi National Congress, the organisation courted by the US for the last 10 years or so as the next Iraqi government. Da’wa are concerned that US plans for post-war Iraq seem to be headed for a military governership rather than a democracy. From recent news coverage, one can also see the Iraqi National Congress starting to realise that they may not be forming a government anytime soon.
“A spokesman for the Iraqi Communist Party, the largest party in Iraq before Saddam’s regime says "We reject the war on principled and moral grounds as well as being the worst and most destructive alternative.””
Both of these parties have lost thousands of members to Saddam’s murderous regime, yet remain opposed to US war plans.
Steele’s piece concludes:-
“Most parties on the opposition committee set up under Khalilzad's (the US special envoy for Iraq)
pressure last week are paid by the US government. Da'wa and the ICP have not succumbed. Pro-war pundits who claim to know the views of Iraqi exiles should check they are not listening to opinions made in Washington.”
Advice worth bearing in mind the next time someone berates you with the anti-war = pro-Saddam argument.
There are some Iraqi exiles (one I know personally) who are calling for war. I don't think they're all dupes, or in the pay of the CIA. Many of them have suffered hugely as a result of Saddam Hussein's regime. None of them to my knowledge really trust the USA and British administrations to replace the Saddam regime with democracy. They blame these for the fueling of Saddam's terrorist regime. Even the Iraqi National Congress who possibly stand to gain most power from war do not trust their USA and British allies. They just see war as their best hope and they're getting impatient. I respect, though I don't agree with their position.
However, the majority of Iraqis I have met are anti-war. They have family who suffer under Saddam at home but who would suffer far more in war. They have suffered the brunt of USA and British imposed sanctions for the past ten years and do not trust these regimes to improve their lives at all.
I met a young guy in northern iraq some years ago who had had his ears chopped by the turks. and another in gaza who had lost one to an israeli bullet. perhaps the israelis and americans should bomb turkey while the brits blow the shit out of israel.
There a lot that bothers me about all this.
I have one Iraqi friend. He's very sound, politically. He vehemently opposes US imperialism and the misery it has caused the people And yet he strongly supports the war.
I don't know what the agenda of the author of this article is, but this friend of mine is genuine, and I suspect he has suffered greately under Saddam.
I'm not saying that this should weaken our resolve to stop the war. I know the arguements, I've been following the Guardian's coverage of Iraqi exile opinion. I'm just saying that there is an ambivalence here, and that I'm very sad about it.
Supposing we coud stop the war, there would be people tortured and oppressed in a way that they wouldn't be under a US military governor. We cannot dismiss the fact that for many Iraqi's, in the medium term, a US occupation would be less horrific that current regime.
And I think as campaigners and activists on the left need to be able to express this saddness, this ambivalence, honestly.
Because surely our leftist ideas are founded on compassionate instincts, and not mere ideology.
Our arguments will be all the more convinging, if more ambiguous, if we can do this.