|
1972
|
|
giovedì, ottobre 30, 2003
Iraq e dintorni. Allora. Per chi volesse provare qualcosa di diverso dalla dose quotidiana di disfattismo preconcetto che gli spacciatori di disinformazione ci somministrano da giornali, televisioni e radio con malcelata soddisfazione, oggi avremmo tre proposte. La prima è un servizio da Baghdad di Tish Durkin pubblicato sul NY Observer che ha il merito di riportare l’attenzione sui reali beneficiari della liberazione e principali protagonisti del loro futuro: gli iracheni.
(...) from here, it is disturbing to note the momentum that seems to be gathering behind those who are back home chanting for the U.S. to get out now. It is scarcely less disturbing to contemplate the belief of some leading American politicians that they can go halfsies: keep funding Iraqi reconstruction, for instance, but put the funding in the form of a loan. (Whoever thought of that probably had a cash bar at his wedding.) This is not because the occupation is some sort of triumph. But if this is about the Iraqis, it simply doesn’t matter whether it is in the context of American glory, American gloom or something in between that these people finally get a decent shot at a decent life. It only matters that they do get it, and the only question is how. Per raccontare una storia come questa si possono seguire diverse strade: ad esempio ci sono quelli che scelgono di pontificare standosene al riparo dietro le confortevoli barriere del loro pregiudizio ideologico; ma ci sono anche quelli che per contro preferiscono vivere la realtà di cui dovranno parlare o scrivere cercando di lasciarsi alle spalle i condizionamenti. Tish Durkin è stato in Iraq e questo è quello che ha visto. One, most Iraqis do not want America to leave now or very soon. Two, while it is true that a huge proportion of Iraqis have at least some very negative opinions about the war and life here since, it is also true that a huge proportion of those opinions boil down to anger at the Americans for not being enough of a presence here, not anger at the Americans for being too much of a presence. Three, there is very little to support the notion that Iraqis would be, or feel, notably better off under United Nations occupation than under a United States–led occupation. Four, although the Bush administration should be hung out to dry for whatever it has lied about, it is widely accepted here that various of their pet assertions happen to coincide with the truth. Iraqis do not need Mr. Bush to tell them that most of the troublemakers here are not resistance fighters, but highly paid, often imported thugs; Iraqis have been saying that from the start. Fifth, a steady stream of terrible events has generated a steady stream of legitimately negative news stories about Iraq, the sum effect of which seems to have been to leave the rest of the world with the impression that Iraq now appears in the dictionary next to "unqualified disaster"; that hardly anything is improving here, and that hardly anyone is or feels any better off than he or she did before the war. This impression is false. First point first. As Mr. Al-Shikhly said in the stairwell, an immediate American withdrawal is the last thing on earth that most Iraqis want. The desire for Americans to remain here for a clearly finite but considerable length of time (say, one to two years) is the view expressed in every public-opinion poll; by almost every Iraqi leader of any consequence, including some of those least comfortable with the whole idea of Western influence, let alone occupation; and the vast majority of Iraqis whom one meets. La seconda proposta della giornata riguarda alcune interessanti osservazioni tratte da Belmont Club sulle modalità e gli obiettivi degli attacchi: proprio il graduale ritorno alla normalità - unito al calo di tensione seguito alla conclusione del major combat - starebbe paradossalmente favorendo la strategia dei baathisti ridotti in clandestinità e dei terroristi islamici. It was inescapable that the Ba'athists and Islamic terrorists would adjust to peacetime faster in many ways than US authorities. Many simply had to pick up the now-working telephones to renew old acquiantances, including those now working for the CPA or in jobs inside the Green Zone. Reconciliation in action. Many simply had to become businessmen, like the traders on the Syria-Iraq border, to import things of interest. The United States seemed to throw away the operational playbook immediately after the cessation of major combat in Iraq and embrace the platitudes so beloved by diplomats and nongovernmental organizations. Gone was the wartime emphasis on information superiority and relentless initiative; gone was the ruthless exploitation of asymmetrical capabilities on American terms; in were notions of image; to the forefront came considerations of political legitimacy and press relations. Out went the sensible; in came the wishful. Death has been the wage of folly. It may be time for America to recall that it is still at war, and conduct itself accordingly. L'ultimo link è al consueto pregevole articolo di Johann Hari che dalle colonne dell’Independent (quindi da sinistra) dà una lezione di buon senso e di onestà intellettuale a tutti quelli che continuano a fingere di non capire che cosa stia realmente succedendo nel paese e chi siano i veri nemici del popolo iracheno. Do you imagine that the people launching savage attacks on aid agencies in Baghdad care about the Marsh Arabs? Do you delude yourself that they care about the Iraqi people at all? Thugs have blown up the United Nations and Red Cross headquarters. What more will it take for good liberal people who opposed the war to realise that these are not democrats who want a decent Iraq? What kind of Iraq do you suppose these bombers want to build? The real picture, away from the frantic TV cameras, is that Iraq is getting steadily better by the day. Iraqi teachers today are earning between 12 and 15 times their Saddam-era salaries, and almost every primary and secondary school is now open. Doctors' salaries have octupled, and 22 million vaccination doses have been given to Iraqi children. The Kurds have never been happier or safer (they have, for over a decade now, been living in a thriving democracy on the land clawed back from Saddam in the first Gulf War, but they wanted the threat of Saddam removed forever). All of Iraq's 240 hospitals and 400 courts are open and in business; 40,000 police are on duty. Yet Iraq has become a magnet for international jihadists who venture across the world, from Afghanistan to Chechnya to Palestine. The notion of an Arab country moving towards the depravity of democracy (as opposed to rule by the Word of God) horrifies them. They care nothing for hospitals or schools. I have interviewed jihadists in both London and the Occupied Territories, and they believe - like old-style Marxist revolutionaries - that it is a good thing if material conditions get far, far worse under the corrupt current system, because this will precipitate a revolution. All decent people - including those who opposed the war - must now work to establish a consensus in Britain and the US behind the path that Iraqis, in every single poll of their opinion, are begging us to take: stay for a few years to ensure a transition to democracy, resist the fascistic bombers attacking those who have come to help, and gradually accord more and more power to the Governing Council in advance of elections. A bomb will always get bigger headlines than a slowly refilling marsh or a burgeoning school, but we must keep focusing on the big picture. Nobody wants the occupation to continue indefinitely. Iraqi democracy is getting closer every day. We must keep siding with the Iraqi people, not the bombers who want to drive away their doctors and peacekeepers. All decent people. Buona lettura. |
A Fabio.
A Luisa.   
  Asia e dintorni Normblog |
