The Mother Ship Lands in Iraq
by
Tom Engelhardt
by Tom Engelhardt
DIGG THIS
Wonders
of the Imperial World
Of the seven
wonders of the ancient Mediterranean world, including the Hanging
Gardens of Babylon and the Colossus of Rhodes, four
were destroyed by earthquakes, two by fire. Only the Great Pyramid
of Giza today remains.
We no longer
know who built those fabled monuments to the grandiosity of kings,
pharaohs, and gods; nowadays, at least, it's easier to identify
the various wonders of our world with their architects. Maya
Lin, for instance, spun the moving black marble Vietnam
Memorial from her remarkable brain for the veterans of that
war; Frank Gehry dreamt up his visionary titanium-covered
museum in Bilbao, Spain, for the Guggenheim; and the architectural
firm of BDY (Berger Devine Yaeger), previously responsible for the
Sprint Corporation's world headquarters in Overland Park, Kansas;
the Visitation Church in Kansas City, Missouri; and Harrah's Hotel
and Casino in North Kansas City, Missouri, turns out to have designed
the biggest wonder of all an embassy large enough to embody
the Bush administration's vision of an American-reordered Middle
East. We're talking, of course, about the still-uncompleted American
embassy, the
largest on the planet, being constructed on a 104-acre stretch
of land in the heart of Baghdad's embattled
Green Zone, now regularly under mortar fire. As Patrick Lenahan,
Senior Architect and Project Manager at BDY, has put it (according
to the firm's website): "We understand how to involve the client
most effectively as we direct our resources to make our client's
vision a reality."
And what a
vision it was! What a reality it's turned out to be!
Who can forget
the grandiose architecture of pre-Bush-administration Baghdad: Saddam
Hussein's mighty vision of kitsch Orientalism melting into terror,
based on which, in those last years of his rule, he reconstructed
parts of the Iraqi capital? He ensured that what was soon to become
the Green Zone would be dotted with overheated, Disneyesque,
Arabian-Nights palaces by the score, filled with every luxury
imaginable in a country whose population was growing increasingly
desperate under the weight of UN sanctions. Who can forget those
vast, sculpted hands, "The
Hands of Victory," supposedly modeled on Saddam's own, holding
12-story-high giant crossed swords (over piles of Iranian helmets)
on a vast Baghdad parade ground? Meant to commemorate a triumph
over Iran that the despot never actually achieved, they still sit
there, partially dismantled and a monument to folly; while, as Jane
Arraf has written, Saddam's actual hands, "the hands that wrote
the orders for the war against Iran and the destruction of Iraqi
villages, the hands handcuffed behind his back as he went to trial
and then was led to his execution are moldering under ground."
It is worth
remembering that, when the American commanders whose troops had
just taken Baghdad, wanted their victory photo snapped, they
memorably seated themselves, grinning happily, behind a marble table
in one of those captured palaces; that American soldiers and newly
arrived officials marveled at the former tyrant's exotic symbols
of power; that they swam in Saddam's pools, fed rare antelopes from
his son Uday's private zoo to its lions (and elsewhere shot his
herd of gazelles and ate them themselves); and, when in need of
someplace to set up an American embassy, the newly arrived occupation
officials chose are you surprised? one of his former
dream palaces. They found nothing strange in the symbolism of this
(though it was carefully noted by Baghdadis), even as they swore
they were bringing liberation and democracy to Saddam's benighted
land.
And then,
as the Iraqi capital's landscape became ever more dangerous, as
an insurgency gained traction while the administration's dreams
of a redesigned American Middle East remained as strong as ever,
its officials evidently concluded that even one of Saddam's palaces,
roomy enough for a dictator interested in the control of a single
country (or the odd neighboring state), wasn't faintly big enough,
or safe enough, or modern enough for the representatives of the
planet's New Rome.
Hence, Missouri's
BDY. That midwestern firm's designers can now be classified as architects
to the wildest imperial dreamers and schemers of our time. And the
company seems proud of it. You can go to its
website and take a little tour in sketch form, a blast-resistant
spin, through its Bush-inspired wonder, its particular colossus
of the modern world. Imagine this: At $592 million, its proudest
boast is that, unlike almost any other American construction project
in that country, it is coming in on budget and on time. Of course,
with a 30% increase in staffing size since Congress approved the
project two years ago, it is now estimated that being "represented"
in Baghdad will cost a staggering $1.2
billion per year. No wonder, with a crew of perhaps 1,000
officials assigned to it and a supporting staff (from food service
workers to Marine guards and private security contractors) of several
thousand more.
When the BDY-designed
embassy opens in September (undoubtedly to the sound of mortar fire),
its facilities will lack the gold-plated faucets installed
in some of Saddam's palaces and villas (and those of his sons),
but they won't lack for the amenities that Americans consider part
and parcel of the good life, even in a "hardship" post. Take a look,
for instance, at the embassy's
"pool house," as imagined by BDY. (There's a lovely sketch of
it at their site.) Note the palm trees dotted around it, the expansive
lawns, and those tennis courts discretely in the background. For
an American official not likely to leave the constricted, heavily
fortified, four-mile square Green Zone during a year's tour of duty,
practicing his or her serve (on the taxpayer's dollar) is undoubtedly
no small thing.
Admittedly,
it may be hard to take that refreshing dip or catch a few sets of
tennis in Baghdad's heat if the present order for all U.S. personnel
in the Green Zone to wear flak jackets and helmets at all times
remains in effect or if, as in the present palace/embassy,
the pool (and ping-pong tables) are declared, thanks to increasing
mortar and missile attacks, temporarily "off limits." In that case,
more time will probably be spent in the massive, largely windowless-looking
Recreation Center, one of over 20 blast-resistant buildings BDY
has planned. Perhaps this will house the promised embassy cinema.
(Pirates of the Middle East, anyone?) Perhaps hours will
be wiled away in the no less massive-looking, low-slung Post Exchange/Community
Center, or in the promised commissary, the "retail and shopping
areas," the restaurants, or even, so the BDY website assures us,
the "schools" (though it's a difficult to imagine the State Department
allowing children at this particular post).
And don't
forget the "fire station" (mentioned but not shown by BDY), surely
so handy once the first rockets hit. Small warning: If you are among
the officials about to staff this post, keep in mind that the PX
and commissary might be slightly understocked. The Washington
Post recently reported that "virtually every bite and sip
consumed [in the embassy] is imported from the United States, entering
Iraq via Kuwait in huge truck convoys that bring fresh and processed
food, including a full range of Baskin-Robbins ice cream flavors,
every seven to 10 days." Recently, there has been a "Theater-Wide
Delay in Food Deliveries," due to unexplained convoy problems. Even
the yogurt supplies have been running low.
But those
of you visiting our new embassy via BDY's website have no such worries.
So get that container of Baskin-Robbins from the freezer and take
another moment to consider this new wonder of our world with its
own self-contained electricity-generation, water-purification, and
sewage systems in a city lacking most of the above. When you look
at the plans for it, you have to wonder: Can it, in any meaningful
sense, be considered an embassy? And if so, an embassy to whom?
The Guardian's
Jonathan Freedland in the most recent issue of the New
York Review of Books terms it a "base" like our other vast,
multibillion dollar permanent
bases in Iraq. It is also a headquarters. But what a head! What
quarters! It is neither town, nor quite city-state, but it could
be considered a citadel, with its own anti-missile defenses, inside
the increasingly breachable citadel of the Green Zone. It may already
be the last piece of ground (excepting those other bases) that the
United States, surge or no, can actually claim to fully occupy and
control in Iraq and yet it already has something of the look
of the
Alamo (with amenities). Someday, perhaps, it will turn out to
be the "White House" (though, in BDY's sketches, its buildings look
more like those prison-style schools being built in embattled American
urban neighborhoods) for Moqtada al-Sadr, or some future Shiite
Party, or a Sunni strongman, or a home for squatters. Who knows?
What we know
is that such an embassy is remarkably outsized for Iraq. Even as
a headquarters for a vast, secret set of operations in that chaotic
land, it doesn't quite add up. After all, our military headquarters
in Iraq is already at Camp Victory on the outskirts of Baghdad.
We can certainly assume though no one in our mainstream media
world would think to say such a thing that this new embassy
will house a rousing set of CIA (and probably Pentagon) intelligence
operations for the country and region, and will be a massive hive
for American spooks of all sorts. But whatever its specific functions,
it might best be described as the imperial Mother Ship dropping
into Baghdad.
Amazingly,
despite complaints from Congress, the present U.S. ambassador is
stumped when it comes to cutting down on that planned staff of his
every one more essential than the last and the State
Department is actually lobbying Congress for an extra $50 million
to construct yet more "blast-resistant housing" on the vast site.
Maybe this is what the "build and hold" strategy, pushed by many
counterinsurgency types, really means. We'll simply plan in Washington,
design in Kansas City, build through a Kuwaiti
construction firm using cheap
imported labor, and try to keep building out forever from our
"embassy" in Baghdad.
As an outpost,
this vast compound reeks of one thing: imperial impunity. It was
never meant to be an embassy from a democracy that had liberated
an oppressed land. From the first thought, the first sketch, it
was to be the sort of imperial control center suitable for the planet's
sole "hyperpower," dropped into the middle of the oil heartlands
of the globe. It was to be Washington's dream and Kansas City's
idea of a palace fit for an embattled American proconsul
or a khan.
When completed,
it will indeed be the perfect folly, as well as the perfect embassy,
for a country that finds it absolutely normal to build vast base-worlds
across the planet; that considers it just a regular day's work to
send its aircraft carrier "strike forces" and various battleships
through the
Straits of Hormuz in daylight as a visible warning to a "neighboring"
regional power; whose Central Intelligence Agency operatives feel
free to organize and launch
Baluchi tribal warriors from Pakistan into the Baluchi areas of
Iran to commit acts of terror and mayhem; whose commander-in-chief
President can sign a "nonlethal
presidential finding" that commits our nation to a "soft power"
version of the economic destabilization of Iran, involving, according
to ABC News, "a coordinated campaign of propaganda, disinformation
and manipulation of Iran's currency and international financial
transactions"; whose Vice President can appear
on the deck of the USS John C. Stennis to address a "rally
for the troops," while that aircraft carrier is on station in the
Persian Gulf, readying itself to pass through those Straits and
can insist to the world: "With two carrier strike groups in the
Gulf, we're sending clear messages to friends and adversaries alike.
We'll keep the sea lanes open. We'll stand with our friends in opposing
extremism and strategic threats. We'll disrupt attacks on our own
forces.... And we'll stand with others to prevent Iran from gaining
nuclear weapons and dominating this region"; whose military men
can refer to Iraqi insurgents as "anti-Iraqi forces"; members of
whose Congressional opposition can offer plans for the dismemberment
of Iraq into three or more parts; and all of whose movers and shakers,
participating in the Washington Consensus, can agree that one "benchmark"
the Iraqi government, also locked inside the Green Zone, must fulfill
is signing off on an oil
law designed in Washington and meant to turn the energy clock
in the Middle East back several decades; but why go on.
To recognize
such imperial impunity and its symbols for what they are, all you
really need to do is try to reverse any of these examples. In most
cases, that's essentially inconceivable. Imagine any country building
the equivalent Mother Ship "embassy" on the equivalent of two-thirds
of the Washington Mall; or sailing its warships into the Gulf of
Mexico and putting its second-in-command aboard the flagship of
the fleet to insist on keeping the sea lanes "open"; or sending
Caribbean terrorists into Florida to blow up local buses and police
stations; or signing a "finding" to economically destabilize the
American government; or planning the future shape of our country
from a foreign capital. But you get the idea. Most of these actions,
if aimed against the United States, would be treated as tantamount
to acts of war and dealt with accordingly in this country, with
unbelievable hue and cry.
When it's
a matter of other countries halfway across the planet, however,
Americans largely consider such things, even if revealed in the
news, at worst tactical errors or miscalculations. The imperial
mindset goes deep. It also thinks unbearably well of itself and
so, naturally, wants to memorialize itself, to give itself the surroundings
that only the great, the super, the hyper deserves.
Percy Bysshe
Shelley's poem "Ozymandias," inspired by the arrival in London in
1816 of an enormous statue of the Pharaoh Ramesses II, comes to
mind:
"I met
a traveler from an antique land
Who said: "Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
‘My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings,
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away."
In Baghdad,
Saddam's giant hands are already on the road to ruin. Still going
up in New York and Baghdad are two half-billion dollar-plus monuments
to the Bush imperial moment. A 9/11 memorial so
grotesquely expensive that, when completed, it will be a reminder
only of a time, already long past, when we could imagine ourselves
as the Greatest Victims on the planet; and in Baghdad's Green Zone,
a monument to the Bush administration's conviction that we were
also destined to be the Greatest Dominators this world, and history,
had ever seen.
From both
these monuments, someday and in the case of the embassy in
Baghdad that day may not be so very distant those lone and
level sands will undoubtedly stretch far, far away.
May
30, 2007
Tom
Engelhardt [send him mail]
is editor of TomDispatch.com,
a project of the Nation
Institute. He
is the author of several books, including The
Last Days of Publishing: A Novel, The
End of Victory Culture, and most recently, Mission
Unaccomplished (Nation Books), the first collection of Tomdispatch
interviews. His new blog is The
Notion.
Copyright
© 2007 Tom Engelhardt
Tom
Engelhardt Archives
|