Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The rising cost of America-centricity

By Ross Buncle - posted Wednesday, 12 December 2007


Saddam was an appalling tyrant who ruled by fear and terror, and the groups and dissidents that suffered most under his regime suffered terribly. But the Iraqi people as a whole suffered far more from the US-led UN-imposed post-Desert Storm sanctions than from Saddam’s dictatorship, not to mention the havoc wrought by the US “liberation” and its ongoing aftermath. And most indigestible is the uncomfortable reality that unlike the US, the Saddam regime understood the region and its people intimately and kept Iraq more stable than the Americans can now even dream of doing.

The question inevitably arises as to the morality of taking no action to slay a tyrannical dragon when action is possible. I’d contend that it depends on the dragon and the location of his lair. Hitler was a threat to the freedom of the whole of Europe, and tomorrow the world, and had to be stopped. Saddam was no threat outside his borders, having had any expansionist ambitions cruelled by the disastrous outcomes of the war with Iran and the US-repelled invasion of Kuwait.

The WMD ruse was always a ruse. There were doubtless multiple motivations behind the US Iraq campaign, but I do not believe that genuine fear of direct WMD attack by Iraq of the US or even Israel was ever one of them. Iran’s weaponry is far more sophisticated, as is frankly acknowledged today, and Iran would have been the obvious target, rather than Iraq, if WMDs were really the primary issue.

Advertisement

The noble objective to rid Iraq of a dictatorship and set up a model for Middle East democracy in its place, if indeed that truly was intended as the crowning achievement of the Iraq campaign, has been subverted by the terrorists, who have utilised their devastatingly effective guerrilla tactics and local knowledge to wrong-foot the lumbering American giant every step of the way since the “fall” of Baghdad.

The Americans are paying a high cost for their ignorance of the complexities of Iraqi culture, and particularly of the depth of the ancestral divides that obstruct any real prospect of national unity. Further, as they now admit, they have vastly underestimated the regional resistance to their occupation and their capacity to contain it.

If the clock could be turned back, I wonder what proportion of the Iraqi people would choose the current situation over Saddam’s regime. I doubt the Americans would care. Given their time over again, they would not be poking sticks at the hornet’s nest that is Iraq. They’d be keeping the hell outta there.

America is now caught in an un-winnable fight in a region it does not understand. Force-feeding democracy - in itself a contradiction - cannot work. No exit strategy is in place, and it is now difficult to imagine any way out that will spare either America and its Allies, or Iraq, immeasurable further damage, let alone rectify that already done. This is the price of America-centricity and the unchecked assumptions and ignorance of other cultures that are symptoms of such insularity.

It is America’s right to defend and protect democratic ideals and Western values, and to use its military power to support allies under threat of attack. But to forcibly impose its political will on an entire nation - dictatorship notwithstanding - that is not a threat to its homeland or allies smacks of a righteous moral absolutism that is little different from that the terrorist enemy draws upon in perpetrating unspeakably immoral acts of violence on innocents.

Let there be no doubt that my allegiances are with America in its fight to rid the world of the scourge of terrorism. Flawed though its practice is, I believe in democracy and the freedoms that come with it. Those freedoms do not, in my view, include the forcible imposition of democratic systems of government on other nations.

Advertisement

Democratic nations, starting with America, need to get clear on where their ideological confines begin and end. While this remains blurred, so does the distinction between the mindsets of America and its allies and that of the terrorists they are seeking to nullify.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

10 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Ross Buncle is a freelance writer, copy-editor, T-shirt designer and ESL teacher. He is the main force behind www.perthpunk.com - the most expansive history of first-wave Perth punk rock on the web - and publishes a blog, The Boomtown Rap, under the pseudonym Rolan Stein.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Ross Buncle
Photo of Ross Buncle
Article Tools
Comment 10 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy