<html>
<body>
<font size=3>Abu Ghraib and the Logic of Conquest<br>
<br>
The lies to justify the war on Iraq couldn’t be more threadbare: there
are no weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein did not collaborate
with al-Quaeda on the 9/11 attacks (in fact there was considerable
hostility because of Osama-bin Laden’s efforts to topple secular Arab
regimes like Hussein’s), the Bush team’s pre-9/11/01 political agenda to
attack Iraq can be easily documented. The revelations have eroded Bush’s
popularity somewhat but haven’t resulted in the total discrediting and
disgrace he deserves. Between corporate media, cowardly Democrats, and a
still too somnolent antiwar movement, we haven’t seen the mass outrage
and uproar that is needed.<br>
<br>
The scandal about the disgusting abuse and torture at Abu Ghraib has been
revealing, and it doesn’t look like Bush et, al, will get away with their
“few bad apples” line. There is at least some attention to, even if not
nearly enough focus on, the policy decisions that led to these widespread
practices. But I don’t see anything in the mainstream media about the
underlying reality: such brutality is the inherent logic and outgrowth of
conquest and occupation. We hear so little about the estimated 10,000
Iraqis that have been killed so far. Nor any acknowledgement that torture
and massacres were common in Vietnam, even without the same “post-9/11
interrogation exigencies.” Nor any discussion of all the Latin American
torturers trained, over decades, at the US school of the Americas. While
US neocons disdain history, the Iraqis certainly haven’t forgotten that
early in th elast century the British colonialists claimed to be
‘liberating’ Iraq, or that the League of Nations provided the legal cover
for British and French colonial mandates in the Middle East. (See, Rashid
Khalidi, <b><i>Resurrecting Empire</i></b>.) To see the full implications
of conquest and occupation, how abuse and humiliation become daily
realities, just look at the protracted horror of Israel’s occupation of
Palestine.<br>
<br>
It may feel harder, compared to the 1960s, to rally around the demand “US
Out!” in an era when much of the most militant resistance is itself
reactionary and repressive. Please remember, though, that the US not only
led in crushing progressive opposition in the region but also very
consciously fostered both bin-Laden and Hussein. Such a formative force
in creating the problems can in no way now coerce a positive solution.
The basic demand of self-determination is as urgent and relevant as ever.
Let’s also not be fooled by high-flown talk about ‘democracy’ – from a US
government that has just overthrown one democratically-elected president,
in Haiti, and has been waging a systematic destabilization campaign
against another, in Venezuela. (The US has violently intervened against
democracy multiple times, as documented in William Blum’s, <b><i>Killing
Hope</i></b>.)<br>
<br>
The peoples of Iraq, Palestine, Haiti and Venezuela deserve our staunch
support against our government’s attacks on their integrity and
well-being. It may feel overwhelming to address all 4 theaters of
struggle. But there is a way in which together they create a fuller and
more coherent whole, by exposing Bush’s big lie that he’s fighting this
war for democracy. We who truly support democracy need to stress that
conquests, occupations, coups, and destabilization campaigns are the
antitheses of the very first democratic right under international law:
self-determination. The urgency and value of challenging the whole
pattern underscores why we so badly need to build an anti-imperialist
movement today.<br>
<br>
David Gilbert, 7/16/04 <br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">The Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br>
(415) 863-9977<br>
</font><font size=3><a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">www.freedomarchives.org</a></font></body>
</html>