[casi] "The problems the US is facing in Iraq are almost unsolvable."

["Dirk Adriaensens" <dirk.adriaensens@DELETETHISskynet.be>]

[ Presenting plain-text part of multi-format email ]

Afro-Arab marxist Mohammed Hassan: "The problems the US is facing in Iraq are almost unsolvable."

http://www.ptb.be/scripts/article.phtml?section=A3AAABCCBCBD&obid=19055

How do you explain the resistance of the Iraqi people? Will the US wage war on Iran as well? In 
Syria? Do we have to defend Arab nationalism? We asked it to Mohammed Hassan, a communist, an 
expert on the Arab world, and the son of an Ethiopian father and Yemeni mother.

In spite of the war, Mohamed Hassan, a former Ethiopian diplomat who is now teaching in Belgium, 
welcomes me with a broad smile and a cordial "What's up?" He radiates the contagious optimism he 
derives from his analysis of facts and history. His Yemeni mother taught him Arabic and his father 
some ten African languages. In Belgium he uses mainly English and Dutch. He calls himself an 
Afro-Arab marxist. It sounds like a manifesto.

American imperialism seems to be surprised by the unexpected resistance of the Iraqis. How would 
you explain that?

Mohammed Hassan. Imperialists have bad memories. Iraq has been bombed already with chemical weapons 
in 1920 by the British under Churchill. Even then Iraqi resistance was strong. Together with Syria 
and Egypt, Iraq is the center of anti-colonial and anti-imperialist Arab nationalism., as modern 
history shows. History also demonstrates that all contradictions in Iraqi society disappear as soon 
as war breaks out.

The imperialists' mistake stems from their chauvinism and their lack of respect for the peoples of 
the Third World. For them they are mere numbers and not actual people with dignity, a high level of 
consciousness, and a history of resistance.

Take, for example, the Vietnam War. Henry Kissinger, President Nixon's Secretary of State and 
current advisor of Bush, wrote in the 1950s that the French would be victorious in Vietnam because 
it was a primitive people that only had bicycles. He was convinced that the industrialized West, 
with its cars, companies, and armored vehicles would easily defeat Vietnam, a small country with 
people who were still riding bicycles.

Robert McNamara, Kennedy's Secretary of Defense, had to admit in 1992: "Our intelligence was lousy. 
The diplomats and intelligence services took their hopes for realities." But in spite of this 
self-criticism, at the end of his book he is still wondering why Vietnam won the war. They believe 
their own fairytales! That is the mistake the Americans are making again in Iraq.

Did they underestimate the people's nationalism?

Mohammed Hassan. Exactly. Iraq has made a turnabout after the revolution of 1958. The country has 
known urbanization and industrialization throughout the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. There were many 
mixed marriages: Sunni with Shiites, Sunni with Kurds, etc. The traditional, feudal structures of 
society were broken up by these developments. The Iraqi budget for education is bigger than the 
total government budget of Jordan. The Iraqis' average educational level is much higher than in any 
other country in the region.

Iraq is also not so self-centered as many other Arab countries. It sent troops to help Syria and 
Egypt in the wars against Israel in 1967 and 1973. Iraq financed education and development programs 
in poorer Arab countries. It gave substantial support to Palestine. In 1979, for example, while I 
was staying in Yugoslavia 20,000 Palestinians were studying there and it was Iraq that paid for 
their studies.

Iraq is also the only Arab country where residents of other Arab countries do not need a visa. Any 
Arab, whether he is from Morocco, Syria or Saudi Arabia can participate in politics, work or study 
in Iraq as soon as he arrives. That is the concrete manifestation of the ruling Baath party's 
pan-Arab ideology. That explains the common sentiment in the Arab world: If you hit Iraq, you hit 
us all.

But the media is emphasizing the conflict between the Shiites in the south who are against Saddam 
and the Sunni in central Iraq who are said to support him. Is that true?

Mohammed Hassan. Also the inhabitants of south Iraq consider themselves Iraqis in the first place. 
Their ancestors were the first to fight the British in 1920 and they never accepted colonialism.

The differences between the Shiites and the Sunni are merely a matter of theology. A Sunni can pray 
in a Shiite mosque and there hasn't been war between both currents of Islam since the eight 
century. The difference between an Iraqi Sunni and an Iraqi Shiite is not bigger than between a 
German protestant and a German catholic.

The so-called conflict between Shiites and Sunni has been created by the colonizers. In the 19th 
century France was able to seize Lebanon because of their support for the Christian Maronites 
against the Muslim Druses. Then this division of the people was established by law: Sunni, Shiites, 
Druses, Christians, etc. Modern Arab nationalism is actually a reaction against this division of 
the people. One of its initiators, Michel El Afleque, a Syrian from Christian descent, also laid 
the foundation for the ideological orientation of the Iraqi Baath party.

But there actually is a Shiite opposition, supported by Iran, in southern Iraq, isn't it?

Mohammed Hassan. Yes, there is Islamic opposition that wants to establish an Islamic republic in 
Iraq. But they are fundamentally anti-American and equally inimical to American domination because 
the majority of the Muslims in the Gulf states are Shiites. They are the vast majority in northern 
Saudi Arabia but until 1991 they were not even granted full citizenship. In Kuwait the majority of 
the population is Shiite but the king is Sunni, just like in Bahrain and Oman. If you want examples 
of discrimination, you'd better look for them in these countries and not in Iraq.

The low number of Shiites in governments is the result of British colonialism. After the fall of 
the Ottoman Empire in 1918, the French and the British have redrawn the map of the Middle East, 
creating artificial states. They installed Sunni kings as the heads of those states to rule the 
Shiite majority. Divide and rule! And take note, the Arab world had never known kingdoms before. 
Creating artificial conflicts based on religion and ethnicity, the specialty of imperialism!

The Baath party was founded in the south of Iraq and is not predominantly Sunni, as western sources 
claim. It is a secular party with Christians as well as Shiite and Sunni Muslims.

You discussed Islam and Arab nationalism but how do the Iraqi Kurds fit into this?

Mohammed Hassan. Iraq is the only country in the whole world stating in the first article of its 
constitution that it is a country of Arabs and Kurds. Kurds were granted autonomy in Iraq, with 
education in Kurdish.

There are different currents among the Kurds: some advocate a feudal model; there is a Kurdish 
bourgeoisie that wants more independence and finds an ally in American imperialism; and there is a 
big faction that just wants to remain part of Iraq.

Also here imperialism benefits from the contradictions. The Kurds in Iraq get a lot of attention 
but those in Iran are never mentioned and yet there are much more Kurds in Iran.

Back the ongoing war. Do you think the US made a miscalculation?

Mohammed Hassan. Definitely. They anticipated a massive uprising of the army and the people against 
Saddam Hussein. The US wanted to make use of defecting units of the Iraqi army to "pacify" the 
country. Now they are met with resistance everywhere. In the cities they are facing an urban 
guerrilla. They were not able to win over the core of the Iraqi army. On the contrary, they have to 
fight it.

They will be forced to occupy the country with the assistance of a few traitors who are much weaker 
than the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan and in a country that is much bigger and more urbanized. 
Even in Afghanistan only Kabul is firmly under their control. In Iraq they'll need at least one 
million soldiers to make the country "safe." It's an almost unsolvable problem.

Also Iraq's neighbors are eventually under threat by the US. Iran in the first place, as Bush 
included it in his "Axis of Evil." American cruise missiles strayed already on Iranian territory. 
There was a first big anti-American mobilization in Tehran on March 28. Will Iran remain neutral or 
will it intervene?

Mohammed Hassan. Just like Iraq, Iran has nationalized its oil industry in the 1950s. Since the 
1979 downfall of the Shah, who was their puppet, the US has no control whatsoever over Iran's oil. 
The US intelligence services hardly know anything about Iran's army. Moreover, the country has also 
some one million armed militia members. It is a vast country with a population of 70 million. 
That's even a bigger challenge for the Americans. Remember that Iran has renewed strong ties with 
Iraq during the past four years.

Definitely, Iran is not looking forward to a pro-American government in Baghdad because it would be 
surrounded by Iraq in the west and Afghanistan in the east. And there is also the independence 
movement of the Azari minority in the north that is influenced by Azerbeidjan, a Turkish speaking 
country under American domination. If it wants to defend its own interests, Iran will have to 
intervene in this war in one way or another.

And Syria? It is also threatened by the US and the anti-American sentiments of its people have only 
increased since five workers were bombed to death by the US on their way home from Iraq.

Mohammed Hassan. Also Syria has strengthened its ties with Iraq during the last five years. It has 
opened its borders and encouraged trade. 120,000 barrels of Iraqi oil are exported through Syria. 
The country's position in the UN Security Council has been principled. Syria's army is well 
organized and through its support for the Lebanese Hezbollah, it was instrumental in Israel's 
defeat in south Lebanon. They know that regime change in Baghdad would mean the recognition of 
Israel by Iraq. The huge mobilizations in Syria are a warning to the US: don't go too far or we'll 
open the borders for assistance to Iraq.

And the pro-American regimes in Jordan, Egypt and the Gulf States. Will they be deposed? Or will 
they weather the storm, just like in the first Gulf War?

Mohammed Hassan. The situation is now completely different than during the first Gulf War. First, 
Egypt, Saudi Arabia and even Syria were actually part of the coalition against Iraq. Kuwait was 
attacked and the Arab world was divided. Today, after twelve years of embargo causing 1.5 million 
Iraqi deaths, the attack is absolutely unacceptable for the people. Not even the government of 
Kuwait, the most pro-American Arab regime, can afford to issue an official statement in support of 
the war. All foreign ministers of the Arab League have signed a statement against the attack, to 
the frustration of the Americans. Of course the pro-American governments are lying against their 
people while in fact they are secretly supporting the war. But contradictions are intensifying and 
the people don't believe them anymore.

In Egypt, the army is led by a bunch of disheartened officers. For example, during the Israeli 
attack on Jenin in April of last year, the army's newspaper published the secret Camp David 
agreements of 1977, which are very humiliating. A military coup against Mubarak is far from 
impossible.

Those regimes are as good as dead. The question is what will replace them? A regime that emanates 
from the people's movement or new puppets of the US? With their invasion and occupation of Iraq, 
they also want to install a regime that serves as an example for the whole Arab world. They want to 
install regimes with a democratic façade that obey them unconditionally, just like in Qatar.

How do you see the future of communists and revolutionaries in the Arab world? Do progressives have 
to defend Arab nationalism?

Mohammed Hassan. The war on Iraq raises many questions for the Arab peoples. The people feel the 
need to unite against the war. The balkanization of the Arab world, especially after World War I, 
has weakened them tremendously. Israel became an object of discord and the feudal regimes of Saudi 
Arabia and the Gulf States wasted their wealth to imperialism.

The Arab countries constitute the biggest nation after China. It has one language and one culture 
and a population that is much more numerous than that of the US. Inevitably, Arab nationalism will 
gain strength, either in its Islamic or in its secular and revolutionary form.

Communists have to support the broadest possible front in order to enable the Arab nation to 
realize its national democratic revolution. That means the ejection of all imperialist forces from 
the region and a break with the supporters of pro-western feudal regimes. As Lenin already said: 
"Revolutionary ideas are developing much faster among the masses in times of war." The Americans 
understand this and have launched two radio stations in the Arab world that target the youth with 
local and western pop music. But these projects failed. The majority of the Arab population is 
younger than 25 and staunchly anti-imperialist. The communists are facing a new generation and have 
to open the dialogue with them, organize and mobilize them to defeat the American army.



_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk