From the BBC
Jordan is hosting a meeting of Iraq’s neighbours on Thursday to rally support for Iraqi elections on 30 January. It wants all the nations present to issue a "clear message" to Iraqis that they should vote in the poll, Jordanian Foreign Minister Hani Mulki said.
However, Iran’s foreign minister is boycotting the meeting in protest at comments by Jordan’s King Abdullah. The king accused Tehran of meddling in Iraq and trying to create a Shia sphere of influence in the region.
I’m of the belief that Iraqis should participate in the elections. Boycotting the polls won’t do the Iraqis any good, as it will only extend the current state of anarchy! To the Iraqis out there, I say, make your voice heard: Cast your ballots.
Wendy wrote:
My Iraqi friends aren’t rebuilding houses that show, they are rebuilding businesses, relationships, curriculums and hope…person by person. It sounds as if you need this kind of inner-rebuilding, as your bitterness will not only keep you from seeing truth, it will destroy you in the end.
My response: I would laugh if the situation in Iraq weren’t so tragic. In the many phone calls I have made to Iraq – Baghdad, Falluja, Mosul – I have heard nothing but despair.
In fact, Iraqis have drawn up wills. When a son leaves for school in Baghdad, he bids fare well as if he were to never return home.
People no longer go to work. There are curfews and shortages on EVERYTHING. In Mosul, for example, parents I have spoken to no longer send their children to school.
Unemployment is 60 percent in Iraq.
In Falluja, there is nothing. In Sadr City, sewage runs amuck, as it does in Mosul. Kidnapping and ransoming are the orders of the day.
Yes, they are rebuilding alright.
And that’s the consensus of US journalists who wouldn’t dare venture out of the Green Zone compound. They’d rather write about the eating habits of the GIs.
Newspapers are shut down and their editors arrested.
Truly great merits for rebuilding the spirit of hope.
Thanks, Linda. Blessing is on us, it’s the only way this middle-aged, second generation hippie wants to live.
Metalordie, you ARE a voice for Iraq and I have learned from you. And I will continue to reflect what my Iraqi friends tell me in my sphere of influence, and settle for second-hand best.
I haven’t told you how to vote, but I will invite you to join in a 24 prayer and fasting vigil on Thursday, for Iraq. I will pray for you that day. I love your country and your people.
Interesting commentary
——————————————————————————–
The right to rule ourselves
For nearly a century, democracy has been denied to the Arabs by the west. There is little sign of that changing
Azzam Tamimi
Friday January 7, 2005
Guardian
Arabic-speaking peoples from the Atlantic Ocean to the Persian Gulf suffer one common chronic ailment, namely oppressive despotism. Most of the states that stretch between the two water basins came into being less than a century ago; many were former colonies of one or other of the European powers. France and Britain in particular were instrumental after the first world war in shaping the entire map of what is today the Middle East and North Africa.
These two ageing imperial powers were also responsible for creating and, until the US took over, maintaining systems of governance in these newly emerging entities – providing ruling elites with moral, material and military support. Little has changed since then, apart from the imperialist master and the fact that the advance in technological warfare has enabled this master, so far, to maintain the status quo with ever greater vigour.
Unlike other parts of the world, and in contrast even to the norm in some neighbouring states, the Arab peoples ruled by these regimes have had very little say, if any, in the manner in which their affairs are run. While some analysts find it convenient to blame Arab or Muslim culture for this lack of democracy, I would argue that it is only the stringent control imposed from outside that denies to the peoples of this region what has readily been recognised as a basic human right elsewhere in the world.
The Algerian example of 1991-92 has been carved in the memory of Arabs and Muslims across the globe. Democracy is not on offer to whoever wishes to have it, and the Arabs – many Muslims too, for that matter – do not qualify to join the privileged club. More than 10 years ago France was horrified at the prospect of an Islamic government in its closest former colony, Algeria. The rest of the western world agreed and coalesced to abort the democratic process before it delivered the reins of power to the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front).
The Iraqi people suffered all forms of repression at the hands of the (until 1990) pro-western Ba’athist regime of Saddam Hussein. But it was far from being a unique despotic regime in the region. As far as the democratic powers of the west were concerned, it did not matter what any of those despots did to their own people, so long as their regimes posed no threat to what were seen as western interests – namely oil and Israel – and still better so long as these regimes were loyal allies.
Preparations are now under way for elections in Iraq. But few in Iraq or the region believe these elections are aimed at producing a truly representative government. The US did not invade and occupy Iraq to allow a genuinely free election that risked producing a government that might tell the Americans to leave. The purpose of the Iraqi elections is simply to try to bestow some spurious legitimacy on a regime that is as unrepresentative and as oppressive as Saddam’s.
Does anyone really believe that former Ba’athist Ayad Allawi, America’s stooge in Baghdad, who gave the orders for the total destruction of Falluja, has the interests of Iraqis at heart? How different is this from what Syria’s President Hafez al-Assad did to the city of Hama in the early 80s or from what Saddam himself did to the Kurds or the Marsh Arabs?
This weekend the Palestinians are to be given the right to elect a new leader, they say, for a change. However, if peace-making is to be resumed and if Israel is to agree to talk to the Palestinians, they can only choose Mahmoud Abbas – hence the international pressure to eliminate the popular Marwan Barghouti from the race. The fact that many Palestinians do not see Abbas as representative of their aspirations or willing to defend their rights does not matter to Israel or its western allies. Nor is it of any concern to the US and the EU that Hamas has increasingly strong support among Palestinians (as highlighted by their recent performance in municipal elections); they still will not talk to its representatives. It is fully acceptable for Israelis to elect whomever they deem fit to lead them, even a war criminal like Ariel Sharon. No Arab people are allowed the same luxury.
Who would free Arabs be likely to choose to speak for them? President Mubarak of Egypt is reported to have said to some western guests “don’t talk to me about democracy; through democracy the Muslim Brotherhood will rule Egypt”. The Arabs have experienced all sorts of political and ideological groups over the past century. But there is little doubt that if free elections were held today in the Middle East, Islamic movements would reap the fruits. It is not of course that these Islamists are anything like the media usually portray them: fundamentalist, backward or even terrorists. It is simply that they are honest, serious and more interested in the public good than personal interests. Thus democracy is denied to the Arabs.
And who is the real victim in all of this? It is none other than democracy itself, whose name has been tarnished and whose values are increasingly associated in the minds of many Arabs and Muslims with military invasion to replace one corrupt despotic secular regime with another more willing to bend the knee to US and western diktat.
· Azzam Tamimi is spokesman of the Muslim Association of Britain and director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought
info@ii-pt.com
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005
Wendy,
I have to say I admire what you are doing. Keep doing it and God bless you and your family.
Yeah, Wendy, but you forget, only Metalordie is Iraqi, and as such is in the best position to speak of Iraqi affairs.
There may be a million sides, but if they haven’t been raised by Iraqis, they simply are moot.
Sorry, but I don’t think Americans like it when they are told how to vote or Jordanians when told not to go ahead with the Israeli QIZ.
Simple, really.
Linda, I am American by birth, haven’t lived there permanently since 1988, and don’t make enough to pay taxes…no one can blame me for supporting the governments’ actions with my taxes.
In 1988 I started working in a UN refugee camp in Austria. The Iraqis I met there were fleeing the war with Iran, and yes, some were Kurds. The tenacity and passion (yes, even in Metalordie) of the Iraqis drew me to them, and after the Gulf War in the early 90’s my husband and I moved to Amman to do refugee assistence work and support micro-enterprise work to help refugee families be self-sustaining. My husband now teaches leadership training courses throughout the Middle East that seem to be mainly attended by Iraqis. Our home is open to Iraqi families who need a break from the pressure and violence. My ten year old sons best friend is Iraqi.
Metalordie, I am sincerely sorry for the past and it’s repercussions in today, and for what the US has done in many ways. That’s why we are doing what we do, there is a sense of obligation. My Iraqi friends aren’t rebuilding houses that show, they are rebuilding businesses, relationships, curriculums and hope…person by person. It sounds as if you need this kind of inner-rebuilding, as your bitterness will not only keep you from seeing truth, it will destroy you in the end.
Linda, Metalordie may have won a debate in your eyes if it stood by itself. There is just a whole lot of the other side of the story, as jameed and hubby have pointed out.
You choose to argue about Maan (and my points as half-truths) because you can’t argue about the real issue at hand.
Hubby, the facts speak for themselves. The Jordanian government has long had problems with Maan and these came to the fore when Clinton ordered Operation Desert Fox. Fine so we agree on that.
But you do the bulk of the argument injustice by picking one sentence “every time a prominent…” and churning your whole dissatisfaction around that leaving the greater context ignored. The arguments you make are cosmetic.
Fine. It isn’t every time; some of the time? Most of the time? Is that what’s picking your brain so?
Who’s simplifying what? Because it wasn’t every time does that mean the entire argument is flawed?
You say I simplified the situation whereas it is you that boiled down all the links I sent to a mere sentence or two.
But no problem, here is some more, perhaps overlooked, literature on the issue.
From the Guardian:
Jordanian authorities yesterday imposed a clampdown on reports of violence from the southern town of Maan amid fears that the Hashemite kingdom could become the first casualty of a possible war with Iraq.
Army units and riot police rounded up suspects after four people, including a police sergeant, died and two dozen were injured in Sunday’s clashes in Maan, a poor town of about 70,000 and a tradition of Islamist and pro-Iraqi militancy.
Telephone lines to Maan were disconnected and nobody – including the media – was allowed in or out. It was reported that a total curfew had been imposed, with shops, schools and offices closed.
Okay, so we agree on the clampdowns. But notice below…
From the Washington Post:
Around the corner from an armored car and beyond the steely glare of police, Sheik Subhi Mughribi sat in the back room of a cramped stationery store, thumbing his well-worn string of yellow worry beads. He effusively apologized that conditions prevented him from being more hospitable, as Bedouin traditions would dictate. His phone line was cut. And because he is a prominent tribal and religious leader in this restive city, police were keeping a close eye on his home.
“But,” he said, waving his hand, “I’m not afraid.”
In a country where dissent is sometimes whispered, Mughribi was blunt. He was still angry over clashes in November that left six dead in this southern Jordanian city. The government blamed the violence on lawless gangs and smugglers. But many here attributed it to poverty, neglect, anger over U.S. policy in Israel and Iraq and the heavy hand of a worried government.
Please pay attention to the use of the phrase “prominent tribal and religious leader”.
From Palestine Chronicle:
Although some analysts say that the crackdown was in response to unrest provoked by the kingdom’s neglect of the city, others say that the government is weeding out any voices of dissent that might demonstrate against an American war in Iraq. A security official told the Associated Press, on the condition of anonymity, that the government was attempting to “put things in order before the possible war on Iraq.”
And from Middle East Report Online:
Again in 1998, Maan’s residents demonstrated repeatedly against the missile attacks of the Clinton administration on Iraq. The attempted arrest of Shubaylat, who had criticized the US and defended Iraq in a speech in Maan’s main mosque, caused such protest that the army placed the city under siege for 40 days. Eight people were killed as the troops sought to maintain control of the streets, while police combed houses to confiscate weapons and demonstrate the regime’s ability to extend its control into Jordanians’ private space. Shubaylat was quickly released, but the humiliations of 1998 were not forgotten.
Notice here how two prominent figures spoke out against actions in Iraq. Both times – 1998 and 2003, the consequences of their dissent resulted in a siege.
That’s two for two. But hey, fine, I won’t extrapolate to keep you happy. I will stick to both times rather than “every time”. Since the use of “every time” makes me pompous and the disseminator of half-truths.
Sigh.
And jameed, you need reading glasses, go back up and check the passage on Kufr. It was from Asif Khan’s dictum on the issue. I, personally, never mentioned the word kafir. Nor did I judge your familiarity (or non-familiarity) with Islam. It remains that you did, but that is a classic antic – define your adversary before he defines himself. Except these aint the US elections, my friend. And your audience comprises a handful. Bantha fodder, really.
This entire discourse started out about the plausibility of elections in Iraq given the circumstances. jameed chose to bring up Saddam’s human rights record, which was a diversion, and I, mistakenly, took the bait.
It remains that Iraq, as a society and political paradigm, worked under Saddam, whether you liked him or hated him. That’s why when Radio Dijla conducted a live poll, 48% of Baghdad respondents said they would prefer Saddam back in power, because of the lack of security in Iraq today. The poll was circa early July.
Even Shia political prisoners who were tortured under Saddam, have come around and said they would prefer Iraq under him. No, not all, but some.
When Saddam was first interrogated, he told Bremer and Chalabi, at the time, he would like to see how they are going to control Iraq.
The world wants Iraqis to vote no matter what the present political climate, lack of proper voting procedure, lack of platforms, lack of security, etc because it does not want to deal with Iraq anymore.
Too much of a headache.
But, this thing hasn’t even started.
Three quick comments to save valuable bandwidth.
First: “Hubby”, thanks!
Second: Linda, wait until the debate is over. I am – 7 GMT and a delay in a response may be due to my body’s demand for sleep.
Third: Metalordie, I am just going to quote you here “Participating in kufr systems is something, which can be avoided” and “As for saying I clearly don’t know anything about Islam, it proves that you are entirely judgemental, something I have not been with you. But that is a classic Arab flaw, which originates in takfir.”
Oh yes, I see. Here in the Post article you quote you must be referring to the only reference to Maan: “Security forces also kept close watch on other demonstrations outside mosques in the cities of Irbid and Maan.”
And here in Arabic news you must be referring to: “One Jordanian was killed and another three were wounded in Maan, 22 Km, south of Amman by Jordanian security forces today while curbing a large demonstration staged against US threats to strike Iraq.”
And you are say these statements make your comment: “Every time a prominent Maan resident spoke out against the Clinton admin’s bombing of Iraq or the impending 2003 war, the entire city would be under siege” true. How are you doing the math here? I see no reference to prominent residents or Clinton.
In your largess, you miss the point. You take the podium and proceed to teach history but instead offer hyperbole. What occurred in Maan was not some simple moment where citizen X decided to take a moment out and speak out against the bombings in Iraq and from such came a siege. There were mass demonstrations in Maan, as we used to call it “the restive city” — so often the reference in wire reports. If you were referring to the JEA chariman’s arrest, that happend in Amman, not Maan.
If you feel the pomposity to teach everyone history don’t do it a wink and a smile, tell the story and tell it fully. What you said is not a fact; recognize that. When you tell the history, tell the facts. In your attempt to be smarmy you misrepresent the history.
I’m not suggesting that there weren’t large demonstrations in Maan that were put down. I’m not even suggesting that the motives of the protestors were against Clinton’s actions. I’m sure they were, at least in part. I’m taking issue with how you are representing it here. You’ve simplified it to the point that you have altered the reality.
Your burden of proof — from your off-hand statement that you represent as history — is to show that every time a prominent resident of Maan spoke out against Clinton’s bombing of Iraq there was a siege of that city. That is simply not true. It is far too simplistic and not representative of the full facts of the situation. I ask, since you’ve taken it upon yourself to teach us history, that you not fill your lessons with half-truths.
As for the particular snide about no report of anti-Clinton sentiment in Maan:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/iraq/mideast122098.htm
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/980220/1998022051.html
My remark indicated that any dissent from Maan – at the time of the Feb 1998 bombings of Iraq, it was anti-Clinton and anti-Bombing of Iraq – was brutally repressed.
I stand by what I said.