A Superpower
Defeated
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
The
news from and about Iraq, chronicling a quickening spiral of disaster
for the US, is spilling out faster than even the experienced surfer
can follow. The news is of a country united in a common cause: driving
out the foreign invader and occupying power; of a militarized, imperial,
foreign government attempting to run an ancient civilization, about
which it knows or cares nothing; and of the impassioned desire for
self-government proving to be more powerful than history's wealthiest
and most powerful state.
In
the thick of all this blood, gore, destruction, killing, and hate,
not even the ridiculous posturing of the Bush administration, forever
promising to stick out this test of will, can reasonably dispute
what is beginning to be obvious to everyone: the Superpower has
been defeated.
We
can begin with a passing commentary on the news, choosing the three
most recent items as of this writing.
- The interior
minister has stepped down on the orders of the US on grounds
that he is a Shiite, as is the defense minister. US administrators
want a Sunni in order to balance out the appointed government
(to think that people used to make fun of Clinton's beancounting).
But the idea that such a step will mollify, pacify, or satisfy
anyone is absurd. The US going into Iraq had never even heard
of a Sunni or Shiite and now the US presumes to pick
and choose a government with such attention to religious-ethnic
balance that it will bamboozle Iraqis into thinking it is somehow
democratic or legitimate? Preposterous.
- Japanese
aid workers and a photographer are captured by Iraqis who tell
Tokyo to pull out or see these people burned alive. Tokyo puts
on a good face and says it won't pull out, but it is obviously
a farce; after all, the government is simultaneously begging
the UN to intervene. Besides, no Japanese citizen believes that
their nation should be part of this sorry excuse for a coalition.
Everyone knows the Japanese government just went along because
of its "special relationship" with the US, which means that
the US has military bases in Japan. Huge segments of the population
want the US out of Japan, and Japan out of Iraq. This event
will only further galvanize the peace and independence movement.
- Just as
the US is becoming aware of deep religious and tribal divisions
in Iraq, Sunni and Shiite are cooperating together in the common
goal of getting rid of the US. It seems that the US has at last
brought the country of Iraq together, if not exactly the way
it had expected. So not only the Sunni city of Fallujah is lost
to the US, but also three Shiite cities in the South. Sure,
the US can apply massive efforts to retake these cities, but
only in the most formal sense. The bombing of mosques and the
killing of hundreds of civilians guarantees eternal enmity between
the population and the US government.
Let's
just add one more news item for good measure, simply because it
will prove so crucial in the complete unraveling of the US war effort.
Donald Rumsfeld is extending the stay for the troops, effectively
drafting them for service. This has made angry and demoralized US
troops – not to speak of their families – ever madder.
| |
|
It
turns out that Iraq was not a country of people longing
to be touched by the magic wand of the Pentagon.
|
|
| |
|
They
already feel that they were lied to about how beloved the US government
is in Iraq how it was a country of people longing to be touched
by the magic wand of the Pentagon. Now the troops are being told
to kill and risk being killed in this disgusting spectacle for an
indeterminate period of time into the future. At some point in this
process, they will enter into an open rebellion beyond what we saw
in Vietnam, where the operation had an ideological mask. This effort,
in contrast, is widely seen as nothing but Bush's private war for
himself and his friends.
Nato
and the UN might take a larger role were either institution interested
in getting involved. But they too are made up of member states who
oppose this whole bloody operation. Meanwhile, the Coalition, such
as it is with the total numbers of troops from all other countries
apart from the US and Britain amounting to less than 15%, is growing
increasingly cosmetic and will ultimately collapse. Kazakhstan and
Spain are as good as gone, and Poland, Italy, and the Netherlands
are soon to follow. Why should they sacrifice blood for this catastrophic
US adventure? When the coalition is gone in every way but name only,
and the US receives no backing from the UN or Nato, it will be alone:
a handful of officials holed up inside the White House against the
rest of the world.
It
is clear where this is headed. The US, the much-vaunted superpower
that only yesterday advertised itself as the great global messiah,
is defeated. From that point on, the rest is only a mop-up. The
US can ride around in tanks and continue to talk of the light at
the end of the tunnel while avoiding that precise phrase. But its
control over Iraq will be as mythical as its declaration of victory
a year ago.
The
US believed it could control Iraq without having to bother with
the question of whether the people of Iraq wanted the US there.
Steeped only in military experience and lacking all knowledge of
the liberal intellectual
tradition, the war planners have no idea what constitutes a
society, and how it operates. What the US planners did not take
into account is that the ideas people hold are more powerful than
air or land power.
As
Mises wrote,
"In the long run even the most despotic governments with all their
brutality and cruelty are no match for ideas. Eventually the ideology
that has won the support of the majority will prevail and cut the
ground from under the tyrant's feet. Then the oppressed many will
rise in rebellion and overthrow their masters."
The
trajectory in Iraq has followed a course known from ancient times.
It begins in an arrogant belief that a foreign people can be controlled
and governed by force of superior arms alone. Decapitate the leader,
the prediction goes, and his subjects will follow a new leader.
In Iraq, the illusion lasted long enough for the US to undertake
absurd acts of supposed reconstruction and benevolence and even
arrange something that had all the form of a government. The power
and the money were unlimited, so the answer to all problems was
more violence, more brutality, more payola.
|
Hans
Blix finally said what everyone has been thinking: Iraq
was better off under Saddam.
|
|
|
| |
|
The
US followed this pattern of carrots and sticks for the better part
of twelve months. Build a police station, shoot a political dissident,
repair a school, shut down a newspaper, fund a hospital, arrest
a cleric, shell out millions to buy off political support, mow down
a few families at checkpoints in civilian areas. Some of us never
bought the view that anyone in Iraq thought of the US as liberators
as opposed to occupiers. But in retrospect, it is obvious that the
entire country has been seething in anger since the overthrow of
Saddam.
Hans
Blix, the former UN chief weapons inspector, broke the taboo and
said what nearly everyone was already thinking but refusing to say:
on balance, Iraq was better off under Saddam. On one level, this
is perfectly obvious and probably doesn't need to be said at all.
And yet it does need to be said because the neoconservatives have
continued to insist that anything and everything can be justified
because Saddam was so evil. It's not true, of course, that any means
justifies the ends. And yet we could go further and state what most
all Iraqis have concluded: Saddam was awful but the Occupation is
worse.
And
so the US is defeated in war. The fallout for pro-Western Iraqis
could not be worse, as radical Islam attempts to use the Occupation
as exhibit A in their case against Western values, culture, and
institutions. The pro-American people within Iraq ought never to
tire of pointing out that this was not America at war with Iraq
but the Bush administration on a maniacal mission that never would
have gone ahead if the regime had any respect for the Constitution.
In its founding and history, America represents freedom and peaceful
commercial engagement. The actions of a junta in control of the
White House should not be permitted to poison the glories of American
institutions and history.
For
American citizens who feel themselves demoralized by defeat, they
need to hear a similar message. The actions of the Bush administration
and its disastrous war are not the actions of our country as such.
It was a few misguided fanatics who do not have an appreciation
for the value of freedom. They used the events of 9-11 to live out
their ambitions to expand the hegemon (as Rice once again admitted
in her testimony: "Bold and comprehensive changes are sometimes
only possible in the wake of catastrophic events events which
create a new consensus that allows us to transcend old ways of thinking
and acting").
We
mourn for the housands dead and the tens of thousands wounded, and
grieve for their families. We can only rejoice as the administration
concedes defeat and pulls out of this country, and rejoice even
more if this serves to teach a lasting lesson. A defeat of Bush's
war in Iraq is a victory for freedom and for American patriotism.
After all, the essential American idea is that society functions
best when people govern themselves in liberty, and that "when a
long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same
Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government,
and to provide new Guards for their future security."
April
9, 2004
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, editor of LewRockwell.com
and author of Speaking
of Liberty.
Copyright
© 2004 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|