The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re:[casi] Memorable quotes: 'the white hope'

Thank you, Hassan, for putting the record straight and
filling in details. Sorry about mangling facts and events.

Needless to say, I know very little about the actual
happenings, let alone the complexities. And I look at it
from a 'foreign intervention' perspective - in this case
the US. So I was tempted to use the strongest interpretation
of the CIA coup involvement I could find.

What prompted me to bring this up was your exchange with
the IPO spokesperson. But I should have been more to the

I agree with what you said to the spokesperson. Your
rebuttal seems reasonable to me. And my reaction to people
who advocate, from a safe distance, the bombing of their
compatriots (or any other human beings) as an act of
'liberation' is the same as yours. The claim that this is
what _most_ Iraqis want sounds like sheer arrogance, if not
ignorance. And why the euphemism? Bombing is bombing.

But the US/UK governments and the western media generally
seem to have the misguided notion that the victim's _approval_
would make the intended slaughter palatable. And they hope
that the 'liberation' ploy will wipe out the acts of genocide
inflicted by the sanctions regime. That's why they are
invoking all these 'Iraqi voices'.

For IPO's interest, I am going to cite Haifa Zangana, an
Iraqi writer living in London. Ms Zangana was a communist
arrested and tortured in 1972. She was imprisoned for six
months and left Iraq two years later, at 23. (She wrote
about her experience in a novella _Through the Halls of

Yet in September 2002 Ms Zangana wrote in the Guardian:
"This war plan forces me to stand by the dictator who
tortured me."

This is not, of course, an endorsement of Mr. Hussein
or of the status quo. It is a commitment to her people.
And she has an option which the war propagandists
won't permit:

Ms Zangana believes that if the sanctions were lifted,
Iraqis could "regain their dignity, regain their power."
Once "they don't have to worry every day about finding
enough to eat", she says, "they will be capable of changing
the regime and dealing with this themselves. I am a great
believer in the Iraqi people."

But this solution wouldn't advance the interests of US
hegemony, specifically the control of oil.

About the much-touted 'moral case' and a 'liberating'
occupation, Ms Zangana says this:

As to "Saddam Hussein, he hasn't been invented out of
nowhere. It's a well-known fact he's been supported by
the West, supplied with all kinds of weapons along the
years. We should be realistic. If we think of the long-term
solution, Iraqis, no matter how much they hate Saddam,
they're not going to accept any kind of occupation."

Still, I can understand other views if they have the ring
of sincerity and conviction. For example, another Iraqi
writer, also communist living in the West, explains
how he had to flee Iraq at a moment's notice. He considers
his experience only. I also read the views of two Iraqi
women living in Jordan, one them the writer Betool Khedairi.
She is afraid of a war in Iraq, says Khedairi - doesn't
explicitly advocate it. But she wants to see the isolation
and the pain ended. She remembers the liberal Iraqi middle
class of her youth. Women were working, Iraqis were wide
open to foreign ideas and philosophies, and life was good.

While also arguing from a safe distance, none of these three
people actually lobbies the foreign invaders to get on with
the bombing - as IPO has done. Nor do they aim ad hominem
shots at Saddam Hussein or peace proponents to make their
case - as IPO, and lots of other people are doing.

I find the logic behind these attacks alarming. It seems to
follow the Bush dictum: "you are either with us, or against
us". Accordingly, bombing is compassion; invasion is
liberation; and a genocidal sanctions regime is a humanitarian
program. Proponents of peace are variously described as
'Saddam's stooges, useful idiots, peace mob', etc. Opposition
to war and of US foreign policy is denounced as anti-Americanism,
anti-Semitism, or a call for murder. The German peace movement
has been called supporters of the Ba'ath Party. And von Sponeck
is dubbed a 'lobbyist for Saddam Hussein'.

Enough already! Why not bring back the inquisition and the
stake to purge all those inconvenient dissenters. And welcome
back to the Dark Ages. Instead of the crazy popes of that time,
we have George Bush, fomenter of war hysteria and hatred.

What I find singularly off-putting is the moral high
horse the war endorsers are riding. As someone aptly said
in 2001: 'The path of US foreign policy is drenched in blood.'

That's why I dug out these Akins' quotes, Hassan. Akins
is actually applauding the killing of hapless human beings,
given that communists and leftists _are_ human beings -
"a great development" he calls it.

The US even _saved_ specialists from the German SS after
WWII to achieve this "great development" worldwide. These
people were used for guerilla (terrorist?) activities in
the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Klaus Barbie (Butcher
of Lyon) who organized the deportation of French Jews to
German gas chambers was also _saved_ by the US. He was
brought to Bolivia under the name Klaus Altmann. There
he worked for the CIA, setting up death squads that killed
and tortured leftist politicians and trade unionists all
over Latin America. (And when the law finally caught up with
Barbie, he was no longer a CIA asset - 'our hands are clean'.)

So the moral stance is a bit hard to take - from Bush & Co,
and from the IPO spokespersons. No doubt, SH denies Iraqis
the means to express themselves 'freely'. But for 12 years
the US has been denying them the means to live: food,
medicine, education, employment, outside contacts - and
above all hope. Parents who lack food or medicine, or young
people whose future has been blighted by an artificially
created poverty have no strength left to yearn for political

I didn't mean to say all this, and I hope I haven't offended
anyone. But that's how I feel at the eve of another barbaric
crime against humanity by those who claim to defend 'civilization'.

Best wishes,
Elga Sutter

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]