America and the Frankness of the Victorious
Published in Sotal Iraq
(Iraq) on 30 November 2010
by Aziz Al-Iraqi (link to original)
(Iraq) on 30 November 2010
by Aziz Al-Iraqi (link to original)
Translated from
by Sulaf Al-Shaikhly.
Edited by Gillian Palmer.
It’s been said over and over that the United States did not succeed in globalization and wrapping all the activities of human society, especially the economic sector, in links to the U.S. capitalist engine, as it succeeded in Iraq. America today has the greatest control over the fate of Iraq, its rebuilding, and its political orientations.
Having broken the state of Saddam and all its institutions, repressive or national, including the National Museum and National Library, and by not having proceeded with re-building the country after seven years, America made Iraq a battlefield to deal with terrorist organizations, led by "al-Qaida," which was exhausted in Iraq and lost many of its leaders.
America has succeeded in limiting Iraq's political leaders in the area of early elections — without a transition period — and pushing those leaders into the roar of conflict and the pursuit of power which does not come without wealth, influence, either legally high salaries or legislating theft, or overlooking embezzlement and spreading corruption.
After the loss of all those leaders to the search for personal gain under the pretext of sectarianism and nationalism, they could not commit to the reins of national sovereignty or the rebuilding of the state apparatus. Not only that, but everything that has to do with the Iraqi people and homeland has been forgotten. This is the biggest success for Americans.
Americans are working slowly and gradually; it will be difficult or impossible to break free from that dependence, and they are still putting the Iraqi political class in a spiral labyrinth for power. They do not care who is going to be in charge, whether this entity that calls itself Nationalist Party, or other sectarians; what’s important to them is that Iraq stays in a cage maze until everything is stabilized and allowed to start rebuilding state institutions, which will all be under American supervision.
Perhaps the article written by the godfather of the re-drafting of Iraq, U.S. Vice President Biden, "What We Must Do For Iraq Now," published in the New York Times and several Arabic publications, explains future orientations in Iraq and the region, some of them:
“...[O]ur administration has said that the Iraqi people deserve a government that reflects the results of those elections, that includes all the major blocs representing Iraq’s various communities and that does not exclude or marginalize anyone. That is what they will now have.”
“...President Obama and I — and an outstanding team of American officials in Washington and Baghdad — played an active role in supporting this effort...”
“The next step is for the leaders of Iraq’s new government to honor their landmark commitment to share power — a pledge embodied in the new National Council for Higher Policies, whose responsibilities and authority are still being determined but will eventually be enshrined into law.”
“The United States must also continue to do its part to reinforce Iraq’s progress. That is why we are not disengaging from Iraq — rather, the nature of our engagement is changing from a military to a civilian lead.”
“The 50,000 troops who will remain until the end of 2011 have a new mission: to advise and assist their Iraqi counterparts, protect our personnel and property and participate in counter-terrorist operations. Meanwhile, we are establishing a diplomatic presence throughout the country and, under the terms of our Strategic Framework Agreement, building a dynamic partnership across a range of government sectors...”
“We must also help Iraq’s leaders with a range of challenges that lie ahead: conducting a census; further integrating Kurdish security forces into the Iraqi security forces; maintaining commitments to the Sons of Iraq, the Sunni groups that banded together against insurgents; resolving disputed internal boundaries and the future of the northern city of Kirkuk, which is claimed by both Arabs and Kurds; passing a hydrocarbon law that would distribute oil revenues and maximize the benefit to all Iraqis; stabilizing the economy through foreign investment, private sector development and new sources of revenue beyond oil; passing a fiscally responsible budget; and bringing to a close its post-Gulf war obligations to the United Nations.”
“Now it is in America’s fundamental interest to help preserve the gains Iraq has made, prevent the re-emergence of violent extremists and encourage Iraq to become a pivotal American ally in a strategically critical region, and a responsible regional actor in its own right.”
The full article should be read by those who insisted on the loss of the Americans in Iraq, those who were satisfied that the Americans brought democracy to Iraq, and those who relied on the leaders of the political groups which lead the political process in Iraq and hoped they would rebuild Iraq.
Having broken the state of Saddam and all its institutions, repressive or national, including the National Museum and National Library, and by not having proceeded with re-building the country after seven years, America made Iraq a battlefield to deal with terrorist organizations, led by "al-Qaida," which was exhausted in Iraq and lost many of its leaders.
America has succeeded in limiting Iraq's political leaders in the area of early elections — without a transition period — and pushing those leaders into the roar of conflict and the pursuit of power which does not come without wealth, influence, either legally high salaries or legislating theft, or overlooking embezzlement and spreading corruption.
After the loss of all those leaders to the search for personal gain under the pretext of sectarianism and nationalism, they could not commit to the reins of national sovereignty or the rebuilding of the state apparatus. Not only that, but everything that has to do with the Iraqi people and homeland has been forgotten. This is the biggest success for Americans.
Americans are working slowly and gradually; it will be difficult or impossible to break free from that dependence, and they are still putting the Iraqi political class in a spiral labyrinth for power. They do not care who is going to be in charge, whether this entity that calls itself Nationalist Party, or other sectarians; what’s important to them is that Iraq stays in a cage maze until everything is stabilized and allowed to start rebuilding state institutions, which will all be under American supervision.
Perhaps the article written by the godfather of the re-drafting of Iraq, U.S. Vice President Biden, "What We Must Do For Iraq Now," published in the New York Times and several Arabic publications, explains future orientations in Iraq and the region, some of them:
“...[O]ur administration has said that the Iraqi people deserve a government that reflects the results of those elections, that includes all the major blocs representing Iraq’s various communities and that does not exclude or marginalize anyone. That is what they will now have.”
“...President Obama and I — and an outstanding team of American officials in Washington and Baghdad — played an active role in supporting this effort...”
“The next step is for the leaders of Iraq’s new government to honor their landmark commitment to share power — a pledge embodied in the new National Council for Higher Policies, whose responsibilities and authority are still being determined but will eventually be enshrined into law.”
“The United States must also continue to do its part to reinforce Iraq’s progress. That is why we are not disengaging from Iraq — rather, the nature of our engagement is changing from a military to a civilian lead.”
“The 50,000 troops who will remain until the end of 2011 have a new mission: to advise and assist their Iraqi counterparts, protect our personnel and property and participate in counter-terrorist operations. Meanwhile, we are establishing a diplomatic presence throughout the country and, under the terms of our Strategic Framework Agreement, building a dynamic partnership across a range of government sectors...”
“We must also help Iraq’s leaders with a range of challenges that lie ahead: conducting a census; further integrating Kurdish security forces into the Iraqi security forces; maintaining commitments to the Sons of Iraq, the Sunni groups that banded together against insurgents; resolving disputed internal boundaries and the future of the northern city of Kirkuk, which is claimed by both Arabs and Kurds; passing a hydrocarbon law that would distribute oil revenues and maximize the benefit to all Iraqis; stabilizing the economy through foreign investment, private sector development and new sources of revenue beyond oil; passing a fiscally responsible budget; and bringing to a close its post-Gulf war obligations to the United Nations.”
“Now it is in America’s fundamental interest to help preserve the gains Iraq has made, prevent the re-emergence of violent extremists and encourage Iraq to become a pivotal American ally in a strategically critical region, and a responsible regional actor in its own right.”
The full article should be read by those who insisted on the loss of the Americans in Iraq, those who were satisfied that the Americans brought democracy to Iraq, and those who relied on the leaders of the political groups which lead the political process in Iraq and hoped they would rebuild Iraq.