« A look on some French chatrooms about Bush and the USA. | Main | COMMON THREADS: Democracy Blowback? »
April 10, 2005
Iraqis between hate and gratitude
“Tens of thousands of followers of a rebel Shi'ite cleric have marched in Baghdad to denounce the U.S. presence in Iraq and demand a speedy trial of Saddam Hussein on the second anniversary of his overthrow.” That is how Reuters, and most western media, described the largest protest in Iraq since the January 30. Most of Arab media and Iraqi daily newspapers choose to underline the anti-American aspect of this demonstration and considered it as the prove that the anti-American sentiment is growing among all Iraqi people, chi’a and sunni, not only among Moqtada Sadr followers.
An article in Al Mada, an Iraqi newspaper, insists on the fact that people came from all over the country, on the call of many imams of mosques during the Friday prayer.
Another one quotes the president of Iraq’s Muslim Ulema Council, denouncing all forms of terrorism, the first one being the “terrorism of occupation forces”.
Al Sabah, the most read newspaper, said “Iraqi people urged for putting a timetable for the withdrawal of multi national forces and end the occupation”. Azzamman, the principal newspaper of Baghdad, is openly anti-American in its editorial, entitled “Two years after: Baghdad is an impregnable fortress”. Here are some extracts of it :
“No people can live under occupation particularly the Iraqis who, throughout ages, have fiercely resisted all forms of foreign presence on their soil(…) Two years since they landed here, there is deep frustration amongst Iraqis at the way they have dealt with Iraqi affairs. On arrival, the occupiers suspended the whole educational system, disbanded the army and turned a country of 24 million people, which had laid down the seeds of the world’s first civil society nearly 5,000 years ago, into a lawless and wild land(…)It is not surprising therefore to see Iraqis pointing the finger at the occupiers for almost all the ills they have come to suffer, including the deadliest of terror attacks. On this day, Iraqis of all hues and colors are called upon to close ranks to foil schemes being hatched to divide the nation across religious, ethnic and sectarian lines. Iraqis need to demonstrate to their occupiers that there is no way for them to advance their coups and conspiracies.”
In a former editorial, the newspaper has qualified the “U.S. ‘oppression’ harsher than Saddam Hussein’s”.
Arab media are not more lenient toward American presence in Iraq. Al Ahram weekly, an Egyptian newspaper, asks “have the two intervening years brought Iraqis freedom?” Here are some extracts of the answer of an Iraqi political scientist and a military expert:
“The occupation made things worse not better. The Iraqi leadership that came to form the ill-famed Interim Governing Council boosted the sense of ethnicity and sectarianism.”
“The decision to disband the Iraqi army, the Republican Guard, the police, and the security and intelligence services was not made at random. The decision was made on the very first day of occupation and it was an invitation to terrorists and to everyone with a grudge against the Americans to come to Iraq, so that Bush's war against terror may unfold in Iraq, away from America and its safety and security. Let the Iraqis die. Two years have passed since the occupation and no one knows how many Iraqis died’ (…) is occupation not terror? Among the definitions of terror approved by the Arab League and the UN is one that says that terror is the murder of civilians. Now the world can see US terror in action, but it does nothing about it. I do not blame the world for looking and doing nothing. The Arabs are not even looking, and when they look they do nothing.”
But not all Iraqi blame the United States for the chaos they are living in. Some try to understand what is happening to the Iraq post Saddam Hussein and take their responsibilities.
The Iraqi communist party weekly publication, Tarik Ach-chaab, analyses the “true face of what’s called the Iraqi resistance”. Instead of magnifying the resistance to the American occupation, like others, the newspaper says “a true resistance is a resistance that wants to put an end to the occupation not to give her a reason to stay longer, a resistance that builds, not destroy.”
Alrafidayn, a news website created by young Iraqis, explains that a year before American intervention in Iraq, Saddam Hussein allied with the salafist wahabist movement, letting the terrorist Abou Massab Zarkaoui settle in Iraq. Since the fall of the regime, this group is aiming to make foreign troops leave by committing terrorist acts. If the Americans withdraw, the chaos left behind will only benefit to them and they will control the country.
The journalist asks “what occupation are they talking about? The occupation officially ended with the UN resolution 1546. Why can’t we be grateful to the foreign troops who freed us from one of the worst regime humanity has seen?”
Posted April 10, 2005 04:43 PM
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)