[Previous entry: "Argentina Squares Off With International Financiers"] [Next entry: "Remembering the Dead and the Horror of Mosul"]

12/23/2004:

"Worth a Thousand Words"

by Thomas L. Friedman

There has been so much violence in Iraq that it's become hard to distinguish one senseless act from another. But there was a picture that ran on the front page of this newspaper on Monday that really got to me. It showed several Iraqi gunmen, in broad daylight and without masks, murdering two Iraqi election workers. The murder scene was a busy street in the heart of Baghdad. The two election workers had been dragged from their car into the middle of the street. They looked young, the sort of young people you'd see doing election canvassing in America or Ukraine or El Salvador.

One was kneeling with his arms behind his back, waiting to be shot in the head. Another was lying on his side. The gunman had either just pumped a bullet into him or was about to. I first saw the picture on the Internet, and I did something I've never done before - I blew it up so it covered my whole screen. I wanted to look at it more closely. You don't often get to see the face of pure evil.

There is much to dislike about this war in Iraq, but there is no denying the stakes. And that picture really framed them: this is a war between some people in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world who - for the first time ever in their region - are trying to organize an election to choose their own leaders and write their own constitution versus all the forces arrayed against them.

Do not be fooled into thinking that the Iraqi gunmen in this picture are really defending their country and have no alternative. The Sunni-Baathist minority that ruled Iraq for so many years has been invited, indeed begged, to join in this election and to share in the design and wealth of post-Saddam Iraq.

As the Johns Hopkins foreign policy expert Michael Mandelbaum so rightly pointed out to me, "These so-called insurgents in Iraq are the real fascists, the real colonialists, the real imperialists of our age." They are a tiny minority who want to rule Iraq by force and rip off its oil wealth for themselves. It's time we called them by their real names.

However this war started, however badly it has been managed, however much you wish we were not there, do not kid yourself that this is not what it is about: people who want to hold a free and fair election to determine their own future, opposed by a virulent nihilistic minority that wants to prevent that. That is all that the insurgents stand for.

Indeed, they haven't even bothered to tell us otherwise. They have counted on the fact that the Bush administration is so hated around the world that any opponents will be seen as having justice on their side. Well, they do not. They are murdering Iraqis every day for the sole purpose of preventing them from exercising that thing so many on the political left and so many Europeans have demanded for the Palestinians: "the right of self-determination."

What is terrifying is that the noble sacrifice of our soldiers, while never in vain, may not be enough. We may actually lose in Iraq.
Full Article: nytimes.com

Well well. Friedman finally lets it all hang out. It's kind of hard to be an imperialist or colonialist without an empire or any territory. Read this editorial, and you couldn't tell that a large number of Iraqis are resisting an occupation. Civil wars are bloody and horrifying things, with plenty of evil to be found on all sides. Friedman is engaging in the favorite imperial activity of unequivocally defining people and their activities out of existence. Just those darned natives acting up again. This is a classic. WHO is 'organizing an election'? WHO is responsible for that Constutution? The sad fact is that every single death in Iraq IS absolutely in vain, furthering neither humanity nor democracy nor any of those fine things we like to say we uphold. It's always been pretty clear, for all his liberalist pretense, where Friedman's loyalties lie. He makes an impicit claim here to speak on behalf of humanity and basic morality and good over evil. He speaks for none of these. Whether he needs to think so or not.