The past week has seen one of the deadliest single suicide attacks (125 people dead) and the passing of the 1500 mark in American military casualties in Iraq.
Neither of which events received much attention in the press. Since the Iraqi elections the American press, in particular, has shown an almost astonishing willingness to accept the President's third declaration of victory in the Iraqi War (the first "Mission Accomplished" we all recall, the second came with the capture of Sadaam who was supposedly leading the insurgency) at face value.
At no time in America's recent history has the press been so cheerfully willing to show its belly to the administration. The breif lull in this credulity during the build-up to the Iraqi War has been almost completely washed away as Americans seem almost desperate to have their belief in Presidential Infalability restored.
So perhaps a review of the facts is in order, hmmm?
Several MidEast regimes appear to be in the process of "liberalising". Libya has given up weapons of mass destruction; Egypt will finally allow opposition parties to run; Saudi Arabia has allow municipal elections. Of course, smokescreens abound. Libya saw an opportunity to trap the US within its own rhetoric, declare it was giving up weapons it never possessed or intended to possess, and thus gave its dictator what was essentially a free pass. Egypt and Saudi Arabia have both, over the years, become adept at allowing just enough democracy to placate its biggest Western Ally. Of course, one of reasons both regimes remain so terrified of real democratic reform is the enormous support radical Islamist groups retain among their populations.
Which brings us neatly to the Iraqi election. Prior to the election I wondered why it was so causally assumed that the osmosis of influence would run from a democratic Iraq to the archipelago of dictatorships which surrounded it. The hoopla over the election was justified in that an exercise of democracy is always heartening to see, but there was a studious avoidance of the results of the election in most coverage. The US backed party of Allawi took heavy loses. The party of the man largely responsible for engineering the election, Sistani, a coalition of mostly religious parties of varying levels of conservativism, won a slim majority. While this coalition has been consistently described as "moderate" in the press, and while Sistani practices a form of Shiism which does not explicitly wish to establish a mullah-ocracy, the link between the central functionaries of this party and Iran run very, very deep. Iran is, especially with it new alliance with Syria and the increasing influence it excercises in Afghan politics, poised to become the new power broker in the region. The ultimate irony was the return of Chalabi to the political scene; had he become president, his con job of the Bush Administration would have been complete.
Iraq is, at the moment, tottling towards democracy, but the effusions declaring this to be a fait accompli and the media's large scale acceptance of this is maddening. Arafat's death and Syria's baffling stupidity in Lebanon remain genuine chances for real progress in the Middle East - and I remain hard-pressed to find Bush's handiwork in either event. Then again, real progress has always been a combination of skill and dumb luck, sometimes much more of one than the other...
Now, I imagine these considerations will be a little too heady for the "why can't you just love America" crowd, so let me leave off with saying this. I understand that politics, American politics especially, is at base a ends-justify-the-means proposition. So I suppose the questions of whether it is proper for a Presdient to lie to get his people into a war, or whether it is proper for a President to reward those who utterly botched the invasion and doubtlessly lead to much higher civilian casualties than necessary, will need to be put on the back-burner. So my question is this - why is the American public so desperate to declare victory when true victory - and I hope it comes, as defeat means terrible things for the people of the MidEast - remains a long, long piece off?
Neither of which events received much attention in the press. Since the Iraqi elections the American press, in particular, has shown an almost astonishing willingness to accept the President's third declaration of victory in the Iraqi War (the first "Mission Accomplished" we all recall, the second came with the capture of Sadaam who was supposedly leading the insurgency) at face value.
At no time in America's recent history has the press been so cheerfully willing to show its belly to the administration. The breif lull in this credulity during the build-up to the Iraqi War has been almost completely washed away as Americans seem almost desperate to have their belief in Presidential Infalability restored.
So perhaps a review of the facts is in order, hmmm?
Several MidEast regimes appear to be in the process of "liberalising". Libya has given up weapons of mass destruction; Egypt will finally allow opposition parties to run; Saudi Arabia has allow municipal elections. Of course, smokescreens abound. Libya saw an opportunity to trap the US within its own rhetoric, declare it was giving up weapons it never possessed or intended to possess, and thus gave its dictator what was essentially a free pass. Egypt and Saudi Arabia have both, over the years, become adept at allowing just enough democracy to placate its biggest Western Ally. Of course, one of reasons both regimes remain so terrified of real democratic reform is the enormous support radical Islamist groups retain among their populations.
Which brings us neatly to the Iraqi election. Prior to the election I wondered why it was so causally assumed that the osmosis of influence would run from a democratic Iraq to the archipelago of dictatorships which surrounded it. The hoopla over the election was justified in that an exercise of democracy is always heartening to see, but there was a studious avoidance of the results of the election in most coverage. The US backed party of Allawi took heavy loses. The party of the man largely responsible for engineering the election, Sistani, a coalition of mostly religious parties of varying levels of conservativism, won a slim majority. While this coalition has been consistently described as "moderate" in the press, and while Sistani practices a form of Shiism which does not explicitly wish to establish a mullah-ocracy, the link between the central functionaries of this party and Iran run very, very deep. Iran is, especially with it new alliance with Syria and the increasing influence it excercises in Afghan politics, poised to become the new power broker in the region. The ultimate irony was the return of Chalabi to the political scene; had he become president, his con job of the Bush Administration would have been complete.
Iraq is, at the moment, tottling towards democracy, but the effusions declaring this to be a fait accompli and the media's large scale acceptance of this is maddening. Arafat's death and Syria's baffling stupidity in Lebanon remain genuine chances for real progress in the Middle East - and I remain hard-pressed to find Bush's handiwork in either event. Then again, real progress has always been a combination of skill and dumb luck, sometimes much more of one than the other...
Now, I imagine these considerations will be a little too heady for the "why can't you just love America" crowd, so let me leave off with saying this. I understand that politics, American politics especially, is at base a ends-justify-the-means proposition. So I suppose the questions of whether it is proper for a Presdient to lie to get his people into a war, or whether it is proper for a President to reward those who utterly botched the invasion and doubtlessly lead to much higher civilian casualties than necessary, will need to be put on the back-burner. So my question is this - why is the American public so desperate to declare victory when true victory - and I hope it comes, as defeat means terrible things for the people of the MidEast - remains a long, long piece off?