| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| IRAQ: Deadly Lies and Fantasies |
| 2004-06-25 |
| Coalition troops in Iraq have come face-to-face with the reasons why Arab countries have a hard time establishing democracies. In Iraq, a large portion of the population follows a very different reality than actually exists. This makes it difficult for any government to make decisions on the basis of facts. Instead, many imaginary items have to be dealt with. For example, before Saddam was overthrown, many Iraqis believed that all their woes were the result of foreign plots and conspiracies, as well as Saddams greedy and vicious rule. After Saddam was toppled, many Iraqis expected everything to magically get better immediately. American civil affairs troops were perplexed at this attitude, and still have a hard time dealing with it. As a result of that attitude, still widely held, many Iraqis believe America is needlessly punishing Iraq for some mysterious reasons. Iraqi-Americans, acting as translators for civil affairs units, could only shrug their shoulders when asked to explain these attitudes. Arabs who immigrate to the West quickly adapt to the local logic, but still maintain their ability to deal with the very flexible reality practiced back home. While the United States recognizes belief in UFOs and secret committees (Jewish, WASP or Bavarian) that actually control the world, as fringe opinions, not to be taken seriously, in the Arab world, such "fringe thinking" is much more mainstream. Arab rulers have to deal with this, even though they can meet with Western counterparts, shrug their shoulders and quip, "that’s what my people believe and I have to deal with it." The prevalence of fantasy, as an alternative to reality, in Iraq is aided by foreign opponents to the overthrow of Saddam by American invasion. While many countries in the Middle East and Europe were glad to see Saddam go, they did not like seeing it done via American troops. As a result, the Arab and European media demonize anything American troops do in Iraq, and feed this biased coverage back to Iraqis who accept it as fact. In the long run, Iraqis will look back on those al Jazeera screeds and say, "how silly, how could anyone believe such foolishness?" But it’s 2004, not 2014, and most Iraqis do believe that American troops are spending most of their time committing atrocities and doing nothing to protect Iraqis from terrorists and criminals. Yet American troops and Iraqi police can still work together, right next to Iraqis holding newspapers full of stories denying such cooperation exists. American troops get used to going through neighborhoods where they always get friendly waves, except on the day after Al Jazeera ran some fantasy about imagined American atrocities, when all the troops get are angry stares. The next day, the smiles are back. But on the day after al Jazeera, or even a local newspaper, has run with some imaginative lies, some Iraqis can go beyond hard stares, and go up on the roof and open up with an AK-47. Usually, these guys don’t hit anything. But often, American troops fire back with much more deadly effect. The bereaved family, of course, blames the Americans. So, in addition to the terrorists, Baath Party diehards and plain old gangsters, American troops have to deal with popular alternate realities. Like the civil affairs people, most troops quickly adapt. Iraqi inability to face the world as logically as Americans is just another problem, like clearing out the roadside bombs and snipers before you move through a town. But lies are weapons, often deadly weapons, and American soldiers die because of them. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #12 ...before Saddam was overthrown, many Iraqis believed that all their woes were the result of foreign plots and conspiracies, as well as Saddams greedy and vicious rule...As a result of that attitude, still widely held, many Iraqis believe America is needlessly punishing Iraq for some mysterious reasons...Iraqi-Americans, acting as translators for civil affairs units, could only shrug their shoulders when asked to explain these attitudes... Addressed this earlier...when a culture's main source of education is gossip, "the prevalence of fantasy" is not such a big surprise. Iraqis have been terrorized away from gathering facts and arriving at logical conclusions in that country for the last 10 years. This is one more reason why any videos of Saddam's torture of Iraqis must come to light--the Iraqis themselves need to get an accurate picture of what Saddam did; this may help them to decide whether Operation Freedom was worth their sacrifices or not. With respect to why Iraqis feel the way they do despite the facts, I would certainly add that the anti-war media has helped them along in their magical thinking. |
| Posted by: jules 187 2004-06-25 2:25:51 PM |
| #11 the good Tipper, not the one married to the insane ex-VP |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-06-25 1:45:40 PM |
| #10 More goodness by tipper. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-06-25 1:28:08 PM |
| #9 If you want a good source on the mind-set in Iraq, I don't think you can go past zeyad |
| Posted by: tipper 2004-06-25 12:30:26 PM |
| #8 Understanding cultural difference is paramount to the success of the mission. For example, if you try to transplant democracy onto a culture that lacks the ideological underpinnings of elementary critical thinking skills, willingness to separate mosque and state, respect for the rule of law, respect and tolerance for the different views of others and a willingness to peacefully abide by the rules even when their own favoured party/policy loses at the polls will not work. The truth is, this is a shame-honour culture that for a generation has lived with a repressive thugocracy. They deeply respect the rule of the strongest thug on the block and have no idea how to interact en masse in anything approaching a western democracy. Ultimately attempts to transplant a western-style democracy here are doomed to failure without massive and ongoing repression plus psyops until new cultural norms can be learnt. Japan and Germany did it post WW2 but they were DEFEATED cultures and had no choice but to face cultural change, as there was a true occupation force with a soldier on every corner to impose it. The Iraqi people don't feel defeated one little bit. The war was designed to decapitate Saddam's regime without hurting them and well they know it. They are in no mood to change their ways. Their culture produced a thugocracy with a tyranny of the biggest thug. That's exactly what will happen again as soon as the Americans leave unless they devote the time, energy and resources to preventing this. But unfortunately I think that process would require the scale of attention that Germany/Japan did post-WW2 and for that there is not the political will on the homefront. It may be that the administration and those who truly understand have the will and the balls to do it but unfortunately in a democracy it is the media and the masses that ultimately get to decide and THEY don't have the stomach for the repression that would be necessary for a good outcome. It was hard enough just removing Saddam, and the brouhaha over Abu Ghraib: can you imagine what they'd be like with a TRUE occupation? One that was actually repressive and lasted more than 5 years? That cost a lot of money? This is what I think Iraq needs to become a functioning modern democracy. Daniel Pipes thinks the best the US can do is to instal a forward-thinking, democratically minded chief thug in power who can edge the people along to democracy slowly. But who would fit that bill? And wouldn't they just give in to the temptation to be the biggest thug on the block after all? The greatest victory in Iraq WOULD be a functioning, free, economically successful, western-style democracy that kept the best of Iraqi culture and threw out the junk that didn't work, a la Japan/Germany post WW2. That would go a long way towards winning the WOT as other Arabs would look to Iraq as a beacon of success, an indicator of how they can maintain their honour and pride and still succeed. Moderate Muslims/Arabs would look to this as a new option and hopefully throw out the Islamofascist route in favour of the good example oof the Iraqi model. The threat of a good example is a powerful tool in an ideological war (which tthe WOT is) and the Islamofascists know it, hence their desire to derail this possibility in Iraq as much as possible. I think that might have been the original desire of US policy makers in Iraq, but once again the lack of cultural understanding has made them err. They thought it would be much easier than it really is because they underestimated the extent to which cultural change would be necessary. and cultural change is the hardest nut to crack. I am sad because i think it was a marvellous opportunity, and I don't blame the US because they tried their best with the tools they had available. But I truly think they are doomed to failure as far as creating a democratic Iraq goes because they are unable to win the cultural wars with the resources they have allocated, particularly considering that with the next election there is a risk of a new POTUS who may just remove the troops altogether. My fear is that Iraq will become the only thing worse than a tyranical secular thugocracy: an Iranian-style Theocracy. In that case it may have been better not to go there at all. |
| Posted by: Anon1 2004-06-25 7:27:22 AM |
| #7 Then again most of the DU is in English so who knows. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-06-25 7:14:05 AM |
| #6 I wonder if growing up speaking Arabic makes the recognition of reality more difficult. Isn't Arabic more suited for conveying emotion than fact? |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-06-25 7:13:22 AM |
| #5 the press has done a pretty effective job of hanging itself. Does anyone, except the true-believers of the left - believe what they say anymore? I've noticed the NYT doing lots of advertising here lately - I'm guessing sales are down. Giving them more rope is probably a good idea for free speech in the long run. It's just that in the short run, we need to do a better job - both here and in Iraq - of assuring that real news has adequate outlets. As for Iraqi alternate realities - I'm not so sure it's much different here in the US. |
| Posted by: Anonymous5333 2004-06-25 4:36:31 AM |
| #4 Think a moment what that would do. Before you do anything, you ahve to think about what you want to achieve and whether what you are going to do will bring that about. Would banning Arab TV help, or hurt US efforts? Imagine the outrage as we, a nation that claims to believe in a free press, censor such outside media? Ultimately I think it would backfire badly, and make things worse off than what we have now. |
| Posted by: Ben 2004-06-25 3:43:43 AM |
| #3 Al Jazeera is not the only hate-America spin master - what about our own NYT? |
| Posted by: rex 2004-06-25 2:28:24 AM |
| #2 I don't undestand it either. But I think the DOD has made a note. Ignorant peple are easily lead. they have no stone to lay as their foundation, other than the one that has been laid for them. Hollywood has been absent in this war. Way to go Hollywood/. You have talent beyond most of the world and you waste it making Shrek 2. |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-06-25 2:19:16 AM |
| #1 I still do not understand why the US did not from, the beginning, banned arab tv coverage. They would have screeched at the beginning but by now, they would have gone to show other massacres or Koran recital competitions. Muslims in the Middle East have problems with logic and therefore problem separating truths from fabrications. There are still people here that will tell you, that the first Gulf War was created by EXXON and the rulers of Kuwait. The plan was to take over Iraq but Saddam found out and decided to put a stop to it. So the invasion of Kuwait by the Iraqis was in self-defence. See, it all makes sense to them. |
| Posted by: Anonymous4617 2004-06-25 1:54:46 AM |