Muslim view on the situation in Iraq

[mikkey 0]

I have made the point in other threads that it is a major problem that US politicians do not understand the the Muslim / Arab way of thinking, i.e. "Baghdad is not Dallas".

I have noticed how the "hand over" in Iraq has been celebrated. Today I open my local news paper and find an article by Amir Butler, who is "executive Director of the Australian Muslim Public Affairs Committee".

I do not agree with many of the opinions in his article, it does however reflect very well the type of feed-back I've had from mainstream muslims. I also think he makes some valid points that might help to understand some of the reactions in Iraq.

The article is in hard copy so I repeat extracts from it:


A lousy kind of freedom
Amir Butler

At first, the justification for the invasion and occupation of Iraq was WMD’s and their certain use against Western targets.

But now we’ve moved from pragmatic to ideological. The mission is now to create the first democratic Arab state; an objective …..(that) will alter the dynamics of the middle East for the better. …..President Bush’s messianic vision of a “global democratic revolution” beginning in Iraq, but ultimately extending across the Middle East. Only by democratising the Middle East can we on the other side of the world know peace and security.

It’s a naïve idealism that betrays an ignorance of the nature of human societies and marks a dangerous course……. One destined only for disappointment and failure.

As conservatives, George W. Bush …. should understand that societies are complex organism that have evolved and continue to evolve in response to unique conditions and experiences. That they cannot be transformed by either social engineering or force is a cornerstone principle of conservative thought.
And ultimately, the utopian vision of democratic revolutions has its origins more in the idealism of the French Revolution and the Left than the hardnosed realism of the Right.

There is no doubt that Iraqis, like all people, love and desire freedom.
However, if that freedom doesn’t mean right to complete self-determination, unfettered by the interests of others, then that freedom is less than worthless – it’s oppression.

The passage of some emaciated version of sovereignty and political freedom to a US purchased Iraqi government may provide a useful illusion of progress, but it represents nothing more than a changing of the guard.

The export-grade freedom offered to Iraqis is constrained by nearly 100 US-issued edicts that demonstrate the farce of this handover.
The edicts allow the banning of any political party or candidate arbitrarily, and US citizens are rendered immune from Iraqi law.………………………….

The fundamental flaw in official thinking on Iraqi democracy is the idea that, if given the opportunity, Arabs and Muslims will readily embrace secularism, democracy and social liberalism.

One need only examine America’s forays into “public diplomacy” to understand the hubris that lies at the heart of White House thinking.

Radio “Sawa” broadcasts American music into Arab homes and “Hi” is a lifestyle magazine typical of the sort consumed by youth in the West: marketing Western pop stars, fashions and cultural and social attitudes to intrinsically conservative societies.

Unfortunately, the imposition of American culture and values is not seen by Muslims as being the solution but rather the very core of the problem.

The campaign to bring secular democracy and Western ways to the Muslim world is not preventing the clash of civilisations, because this is the clash of civilisations itself.

Like everyone, Muslims value freedom and desire the freedom to choose their destiny and governments that represents their own interests.
However, after wasting hundreds of billions of their nations’ wealth and sacrificing so many young lives, could America’s commitment to freedom ever accommodate a populist Iraqi government that reflected the anti-Israeli, anti-American sentiment of the majority of its constituents?

Instead, it seems certain that America and its allies will continue with the elaborate charade that the occupation is for the protection of the Iraqi people; each attack on Westerners by Iraqi insurgents will then be cited as a further proof of the need to to remain and, as more atrocities are committed by US soldiers to maintain the occupation and counter popular insurgency, our leaders will offer more apologies to Muslims about this is not what the West is really about.

This may not be what America – or indeed the West – is about. But it is what occupation has always been about.

If we are to continue to try to force the square pegs of secular democracy and Western ways into the round holes of a conservative Muslim society, then we will continue to see escalating resistance and violence.

The ”handover” will make as much difference in Iraq as the Nazi-imposed Vichy government did in France.



As mentioned above, I do not support the opinions of the writer, but I think it probably represents mainstream muslim thinking. Some of the points he makes in regard to the problems of trying to enforce western values on muslim societies make sense to me. The question must be if the whole US strategy in the ME is doomed due to lack of understanding of the local culture.

---------------------------------------------------------
When people look like ants - pull. When ants look like people - pray.

[feuergnom 29]

Quote

of trying to enforce western values on muslim societies

reminds me of a scene in full metal jacket where this general says "in every gook there's an american trying to ge out & we are here to help him ...."
flame away

The universal aptitude for ineptitude makes any human accomplishment an incredible miracle

dudeist skydiver # 666