« Hitler's writing popular in Turkey, blamed for Anti-Americanism | Main | Welcome Mr Wolfowitz, says Europe »

March 20, 2005

Demonstrations against the War in Iraq

Two years after the American-led invasion of Iraq, people from many parts of the world went to the streets protesting, but not in as large numbers as in 2003. The demonstrations in Europe were larger than in the United States, and the European protesters received much more media coverage too. The overall tendency – apart from in the U.S. – was that the largest demonstrations took place in countries involved in the war coalition.

Sunday March 20th The New York Times reports that “Beyond New York and San Francisco, protests unfolded in Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Diego and what organizers said were 725 other cities and towns … Numbers were hard to gauge, but it seemed likely that tens of thousands took part across America”. Only late in the article by McFadden, the European demonstrations are mentioned:

In Europe, the gatherings were also modest compared to the 2003 protests. But 45,000 people marched in London in the day's largest protest. In Istanbul, Turkey, 15,000 demonstrated. In Spain, protests unfolded in nine cities, including Madrid and Barcelona. About 3,000 demonstrators halted traffic in Athens, and there were protests in Rome, Oslo, Stockholm and other cities.

In Denmark, 3-4,000 people gathered in Copenhagen, according to Berlingske Tidende. Denmark is participating in the war with close to 500 soldiers. Like in most other war coalition countries, the Danish presence in Iraq has been welcomed by the right wing parties and media, but criticized by the left wing parties and media. The disagreement about Iraq is on-going and was also obvious in the media’s coverage of the demonstrations. The conflict mainly regards when to withdraw the troops, where the left wing argues for a quick withdrawal.

The moderate/right wing newspapers embraced the Danish military effort: “Iraq is moving toward freedom and democracy. That is why we need to stay” and “the coalition must stay, not for symbolic reasons, and not for eternity, but in order to finish the job”, the editorial of Berlingske Tidende stated. “To set a date for a Danish withdrawal of troops would not only be naïve, but also a give-away to the terrorist forces trying to get us out”, said Jyllands-Posten.

The left wing newspaper Information is very critical to the war and the Danish participation in the occupation: “Silvio Berlusconi’s statement about a beginning Italian withdrawal was Thursday followed by the Bulgarian government’s decision about a downsizing and later possible withdrawal from the military operation. If they both leave, Blair and Fogh [the Danish prime minister] will be the only Europeans with troops in Iraq”. The editorial quotes a poll saying that 85 percent of the Iraqis want the US-led troops out as soon as possible, and continues: “The Americans have removed Hussein, but by their continued presence they infringe the Iraqis’ pride and are in the eyes of many actually causing the continued insurgency and terror”. And finally: “For the dead civilian Iraqis there is no doubt. Their human rights were definitively violated by an invading army with false reasons and mixed motives. That can never be called just”.

In the evening television news TV-Avisen, a Danish protester was asked “Do you think Bush is listening to your complaints?”, and the answer was a quick and obvious “no, of course not” followed by laughter. But the demonstrator hoped that his march against the war would make an impact on the Danish prime minister.

In my opinion, this last remark by the protester indicates an important aspect of the world-wide demonstrations. People are not necessarily protesting in order to make Bush change his mind, but to make their national government change policies toward Iraq. This might also explain why the demonstrations seem to be larger in countries with troops in Iraq. The implicit argument is that “the U.S. does not listen to us, so we can’t make Bush change his mind, but our own country should not be part of this unjust war, and that is why our troops should be withdrawn”. Or in other words, maybe the demonstrations were more directed towards participation in the war than they were directed towards the war as such?

Posted March 20, 2005 09:25 PM

Comments

Post a comment