Writing about “national reconciliation,” in the words of Nouri al-Maliki, prime minister of the so-called “Iraqi Government,” is a waste of time because it started, collapsed and was buried with the other initiatives that aimed at prolonging the occupation.
The same applies to the meeting between a member of the “exiled opposition” and al-Maliki, which ended with the latter making a press statement and setting up further meetings with broader aims. Let us see this in view of the fact that the Iraqis have had their fare share of disasters that befell them as a consequence of meetings between the “exiled opposition” and al-Maliki’s men, in the period preceding the Iraq war of 2003, starting from [Ahmad] al-Chalabi and [Kenan] Makiya and ending with [Abdul Aziz] al-Hakim and Hamid Majid Moussa. What is happening presently barely differs, in essence, from which preceded, except that it is quick propaganda, whose seller knows it is a cheap and whose effectivity won’t last long.
Therefore, writings about the details of this “national reconciliation” are phoney and interest in the “what,” “who” and “how” of the project are not only pointless but mindless, particularly amidst the politics of suppressing the real happenings on the Iraqi streets: from the occupation’s odious crimes, oppression and intensifying corruption (most important of all is that these represent a systematic hushing up of the Iraqi people’s patriotic resistance) to the deceptive media portrayal of the people’s priorities as boiling down to the participation or not of so-and-so or another in the political process. In all this disingenuous political wrangling and rhetoric on the freedom of expression, democracy, the truth and accountability of those who perpetrated crimes are lost, as is the accountability for the death of a million, the flight of millions, the violation of many women’s honour, and the destruction and pillaging of the country. All the while, the occupation’s government and its sectarian politics continue.
Most of the Iraqi and Arabic press, in varying degrees, contribute to manufacturing deceit in favour of the occupier and against the Iraqi resistance. It is, thus, incumbent on us to recognise that we face an enemy which has learnt how to serve [media] offerings covered in spices. With the help of a conniving sections of the media, which has its own interests or is just ensuring its survival, words relating to the occupation, the occupying army, its crimes, and the long-holding Status of Forces Agreement [SOFA], have been wiped clear of its lexicon, such that the above terms become the clean and sterile “multi-national forces” and “withdrawal agreement,” respectively. The word “resistance” and mention of resistance operations against the occupation army has become blasphemy, as if by decree from American imperialism which, at the same time, encourages every politician, broadcaster and writer to talk in favour of accepting the status quo; in other words, accepting the occupation by doubting the ability of the resistance to oppose it.
Six bitter years of American occupation have proven that if any issue should take priority it should be treating what is going on in occupied Iraq, and this is armed resistance. The word which should precede every speech is “resistance.” Writings which should take precedence over all others should be those on resistance. Resisting the occupier is self-liberation from the slavery of surrender to the status quo. Resistance is taking collective initiative. Resistance is the moment of change towards justice for all.
When the enemy fails to put an end to the resistance, in order to continue opposing it, it devises new expressions which give it some breathing space before the resistance strikes again. The enemy is compelled by his failures to stop and change guise, so that he can draw a new flock of slaves and yes-men. For every phase there is a tactic and for every tactic there are new faces, with a new name here and a new name there.
Resistance operations, during periods in which the occupier and his agents become overconfident after being able to subjugate the Iraqi people further, are to be fundamentally distinguished in three ways. Firstly, the resistance is the only force capable of realising the will of the Iraqi people in getting rid of the occupier, neo-colonialism and preserving its own unity, the unity of Iraq and regaining its dignity. Secondly, the armed resistance continues to target the enemy American and British forces, side by side with all other forms of resistance, including through media, culture and kinship. The numbers of dead U.S. occupation forces in Iraq during the past six months, including December 2007 and January 2008, is greater than that of the same period in Afghanistan. Furthermore, the number of dead U.S. soldiers in 2008, were 314 in Iraq as opposed to 155 in Afghanistan. In the last two months, U.S. military personnel killed in Iraq reached 32, the exact same number as in Afghanistan. There numbers do not include military personnel in the Green Zone, contractors and mercenaries. This highlights that American President Obama, who built his election win on the back of the slogan “change,” will remain the prisoner of Bush’s legacy and thus his promises will simply be falsehoods. As for the third distinction, the resistance’s ability to dynamically adopt new methods still astounds the enemy, despite the great difficulties it faces in its war against the most arrogant, largest and best equipped army in the world.
It is possible to watch videos of spectacular attacks by the resistance on YouTube. In them we find the brave resister, eager for the operation’s success against the enemy and careful to preserve the safety of the innocent. This reality is far from that which the enemy claims, blaming the resistance fighter for the death of innocent civilians. The resistance fighter comes as close as he possibly can to the enemy machine, from armoured cars to tanks, and then quickly pelts them with explosives which inflict direct damage and cause them to disperse, in an Iraqi land which cannot be enslaved. The young resistance fighter’s attacks on the enemy machine, with its advanced weapons and highly trained soldiers, breaks the myth and deception that the agents of colonialism perpetuate, which is that an acceptance of the status quo and the inability of the people to resist their occupier. The young fighter that approaches the steely enemy machinery, armed by his determination and belief, will not give up until he achieves what he wishes, for himself and for his people.
The number of armed patriotic resistance acts has exceeded thousands, from 2003 to this day, as much as the fighters have breached the enemy checkpoints, its intelligence services, the watching eyes of its agents, the walls built around areas and cities, guard dogs and iris-screening technologies.
The resistance fighter has managed, in various ways, to penetrate the depths of the enemy’s camps, its fortified green zone (just like the castles of the middle ages), to deliver the message that he is fighting for his country, his honour, his dignity and his values. In other words, he is defending his rights and his independence.
The initiative that politicians, cultured persons and Iraqi and Arab media men should work on, encourage and support is that of the Iraqi resistance fighter. This is the resistance fighter who depends on the simplest and most elementary of means in waging war on the colonialist, making weapons, protecting his and his locality’s family and stopping the avaricious imperialist expansion. As for whatever al-Maliki and other propagandists of the occupation’s political project name and decide on, both within and without Iraq, they are nothing but futile.
Ms. Zangana is a writer from Iraq.
About this publication