For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from marching on to
Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the miserable
deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists who
oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the tens of
thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed on the
establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by annihilating the
Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the long-term
aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
========================================
Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time: 01:32
(GMT+3)
Interview / Vicious circles closing in
By Micha Odenheimer
Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and dangerous
elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas von der
Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on human
rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent eight
months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country just
after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992, Von der
Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called Wadi,
operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved out for
Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi refugees in
Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has founded the
first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in helping
the local government reform the prison system that has been left over from
Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and works
closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German magazines such
as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
"Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He is one
of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on the left
who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing critique
of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his other
activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German literature
department at the University of Frankfurt.
This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
======================================================
When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just another
Middle East dictatorship?
Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very quickly
realized that I could not compare the situation there to other Middle
Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This country
was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the Shi'ite
area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks after the
uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the city. The
majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the market.
There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
"People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified that
their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four months to
learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie down in
the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed everyone
who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It was
forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or 70,000
people were killed in this area in 1991.
"The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed was to
repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the south
was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam said
before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people, not
really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could not
continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
"Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often - for a good
dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make a phone
call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is so
palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a dictatorship,
but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If there is
no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be arrested.
There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything political. In
Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can relax. You
know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong place at
the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
"When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of conversations
with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was watching
television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the second
part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving Iraq
out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory if
daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard him. He
was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken person.
Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish into an
Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed approximately
one million of his own citizens since 1979.
"Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and Sunnis. There
were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign against the
Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed, and about
100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to a
million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre was in
the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000 Shi'ites
in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous massacres
against communists over the past two decades.
"The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A million
Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million Iraqis died
of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were killed in
the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally displaced,
and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten percent
of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule of
Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an accident. It
is systematic."
What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
"The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of Mussolini
and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated themselves
from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and American
imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and anti-imperialist, and
it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is explained
through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general, and Iraq,
in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and the
natural leader of Arab unity."
So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
"Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of ruling a
united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East and West.
Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be strong Arab
fighters."
Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
"Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather of
pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders of the
Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the real
Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially during the
Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they loaded
their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the Zionists, they
said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the Arabs.
`We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind of
spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold against
Islam."
Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
"Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies, the same
conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in the name
of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned climate of
Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam is not
an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror organizations, I
would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between Iraq
and Al Qaeda.
"I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the footsteps of
Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was trying to
strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put `Allah
Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed different
Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world. There is a
terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according to the
Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries were
being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use chemical
weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are two
trees growing in the same soil."
So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush has
proclaimed.
"American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes. Firstly, it was
a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for example,
about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge mistake not
to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared democracy
in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
"With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in the Middle
East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a mistake
of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the mistakes
it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out
of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street, and what
kind of affect could it have to topple him?
"The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and Islamic
world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This would
give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a lot of
very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states would
be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a pan-Arabist,
anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the tradition of
the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations like the
Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization. He is
paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and indirectly
responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
"Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to Iraq
since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which was a huge
mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the security
apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within the
Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements should be
isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against others
who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq in the
next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or biological
attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think, would be
another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to make the
distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting something
completely new and democratic?
"In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public uprising. They
hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam Hussein
and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam has been
trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are carried
out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one can
threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling Iraq. The
hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or Richard
Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just change
someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If they
really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
"Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that people
cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a possibility is
created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They will
uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling regime;
you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think about
what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy, which is
a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region. Iraq
considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all the
different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
"So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to creating
a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect other
countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is: Do the
Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran and
Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich country
and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as a
democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split off
legitimate?
"Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you already have
a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you have a
tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never wanted to
split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq with
strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split off.
Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite are the
majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From my
experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are attracted by
the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition, mainly
in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and strongest
communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been strongly
repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
"I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized internationally. It
is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions against
Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government. Turkey, Iran
and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under these dire
circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not really a
democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal and
free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of speech,
up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call it
paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds are able
to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
"Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially until we
know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to consider
that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for 30 years,
Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam Hussein is
conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It is hard
to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years like the
Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and because of
international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are really ready
to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very good for
the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the one in
1991, then I am against it, too.
"At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign against
Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because the
regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now there are
tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security forces
come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and you. Five
hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons are
overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000 to
700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
"So the question is: Are they really ready to support democracy in the
Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or do they
just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I oppose
this war very much."
During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating after
the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is attacked this
time?
"Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the Americans. If
the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the leaders, on
the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on the
Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this point: This
is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in fighting
Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking civilians.
There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with weapons of
mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the democratization
of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition and
against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it should only
be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is not
conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to support a
multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and only
hostile to this government."
What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in liberated
Kurdistan?
"The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the Kurds,
but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still, people
know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive attitude
toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In Syria,
people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in Kurdistan,
people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World Trade
Center attack.
"In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all taught in
Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy, blood-suckers,
part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes, there are
some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy theory.
In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the Jewish
community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying that it
was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that the Jewish
heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
"Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week, Saddam
Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is the
Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The same
thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured and
killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different attitude
toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel than other
Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much more than
they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to work with a
future Iraqi government than with any other government in the region. If the
Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
anti-Jewish sentiment."
What do you think drives German policy against U.S. intervention in
Iraq?
"Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One should not
forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of the Scud
missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German assistance,
Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own people in
Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran, Libya
and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany. German
policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from trade with
Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of Iraq.
"Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as during the
last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on the
anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain German
ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War I and
escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward, which
has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies: America,
the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very strong
in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
"Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible dictator
murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him, and people
blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle East, not
Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the region.
Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The majority of
people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were tremendous
demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because Germany
is stronger.
"Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy, which
in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself to the
U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an attempt to
tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq. Also, the
Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they tell about
the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq and a lot
of German enterprises."
So both the left and the right in Germany have strong anti-American
feeling?
"Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment, you can
hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far left
wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he is
fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German battle.
And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think that
Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is fighting
for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the left say
that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve any
problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should oppose it.
This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
The European and Third World left have developed an ideology that
unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling and, to a
certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind this
combination?
"This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial capital
and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea was later
adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does not
criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the surface
[aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly capitalists - is
automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not speaking
about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization rhetoric
is about.
"These associations are so deeply written inside European and
especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain Leninist
groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is more or
less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question of
whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or whether the
government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989, anti-Semitism
and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space on the
left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were hidden in the
signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these ideas can
be found in the mainstream.
"So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the '20s:
There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are fighting
against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge American
trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt a
universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the purveyors
of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been forgotten.
These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in the
Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since September
11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians and
Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and Britain
on the other."
Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a Marxist, see
as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S. as the
purveyor of global capitalism?
"The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together Hamas,
Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the Balkans, the
Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very active in
the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism or
barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I think the
fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to be its
successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of the
Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out of
the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They didn't fall
from the moon.
"But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which means
in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its own
creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better world.
The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very important -
issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a very small
minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with the
Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything. They
are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of emancipation.
"In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the '30s.
On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews are always
in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting for a
capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National Socialist,
self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In 1939, the
Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
self-determination in the Third World. They had a very anti-colonialist
phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are being
used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and the
Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
"Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of the U.S.,
supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is signaling that
it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in the
Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany is
being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So people
understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is quite
interesting - and quite horrifying."
PussyFoots of Peace
-
Type: discussion
Comments
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, furtherfield wrote:
> I didn't know discourse was allowed any more in the states
Flat + idiotic + incorrect States bashing.
> - but I am reassured by your need for it.
One of the control mechanisms of democraciez world-wide
is discourse. Rattling off your tongues, banking on the
two major facotors:
-your words have no impact on Reality, but they waste your
energy and tire you out
-average confusion of words as actions, the Church of Literacy,
and the peculiar satisfaction that mouthing off tends to give one
a bit like masturbation, you know
> marc
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
> > Obviously, you are unable to see that hand-wringing tut-tut is a cause
of
> > much death. Read the article and tell me that the deaths in Iraq did not
> > happen. Tell me that those deaths could not have been preventable. Or
> > perhaps you are a Saddam sucker, and you haven't a single clue about how
> > to make Iraq safe for the Iraqi people or perhaps you couldn;t care less
> > about THOSE people.
Very typical of people like you to have no answers to the above.
—– Original Message —–
From: "furtherfield" <[email protected]>
> I didn't know discourse was allowed any more in the states - but I am
> reassured by your need for it.
> marc
>
> > —– Original Message —–
> > From: "furtherfield" <[email protected]>
> > > Scary!
> > >
> > > Wally - er, are you an artist or an FBI fag,
> >
> > What an incredibly stupid remark. Is that what you call discourse,
> > arguement, dialogue? I've published and exhibited, so what does that
make
> > me?
> >
> > > I cannot believe what you are
> > > saying.
> >
> > Perhaps that is because you have your head stuck somewhere and are
> incapable
> > of reading AND comprehending. I happen to regard Thomas von der
> > Osten-Sacken"s caveats seriously. He has been there. He is a
humanitarian.
> > Similar to George Orwell, he is a leftist critical of leftists.
> >
> > > It's like the age of enlightenment never happened. Not in your neck
> > > of the woods, anyway…
> >
> > Obviously, you are unable to see that hand-wringing tut-tut is a cause
of
> > much death. Read the article and tell me that the deaths in Iraq did not
> > happen. Tell me that those deaths could not have been preventable. Or
> > perhaps you are a Saddam sucker, and you haven't a single clue about how
> to
> > make Iraq safe for the Iraqi people or perhaps you couldn;t care less
> about
> > THOSE people.
> >
> > > > For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from
marching
> > on
> > > to
> > > > Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the
miserable
> > > > deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists
> who
> > > > oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the
> tens
> > of
> > > > thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
> > > > dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed
on
> > the
> > > > establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by
> annihilating
> > > the
> > > > Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the
> long-term
> > > > aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ========================================
> > > >
> > > > Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time:
01:32
> > > > (GMT+3)
> > > >
> > > > Interview / Vicious circles closing in
> > > > By Micha Odenheimer
> > > >
> > > > Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and
> > dangerous
> > > > elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
> > > >
> > > > A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas
von
> > der
> > > > Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on
> human
> > > > rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent
> eight
> > > > months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country
> just
> > > > after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992,
Von
> > der
> > > > Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called
Wadi,
> > > > operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved
> out
> > > for
> > > > Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi
refugees
> in
> > > > Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has
> founded
> > > the
> > > > first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in
> > helping
> > > > the local government reform the prison system that has been left
over
> > from
> > > > Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and
works
> > > > closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
> > > >
> > > > Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German
magazines
> > > such
> > > > as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
> > > > "Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He
> is
> > > one
> > > > of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on
the
> > left
> > > > who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing
> > critique
> > > > of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his
other
> > > > activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
> > > > German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German
> > literature
> > > > department at the University of Frankfurt.
> > > >
> > > > This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
> > > > ======================================================
> > > >
> > > > When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just
> > > another
> > > > Middle East dictatorship?
> > > >
> > > > Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very
quickly
> > > > realized that I could not compare the situation there to other
Middle
> > > > Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This
> > country
> > > > was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the
> > Shi'ite
> > > > area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks
> after
> > > the
> > > > uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the
city.
> > The
> > > > majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the
> market.
> > > > There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
> > > >
> > > > "People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified
> that
> > > > their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
> > > > services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four
months
> to
> > > > learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie
down
> > in
> > > > the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed
> > everyone
> > > > who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It
was
> > > > forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or
> > > 70,000
> > > > people were killed in this area in 1991.
> > > >
> > > > "The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed
> was
> > to
> > > > repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
> > > > bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the
> > south
> > > > was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam
> > said
> > > > before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people,
> not
> > > > really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could
not
> > > > continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
> > > >
> > > > What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
> > > >
> > > > "Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often -
for
> a
> > > good
> > > > dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make
a
> > > phone
> > > > call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is
so
> > > > palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a
> > > dictatorship,
> > > > but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If
> there
> > > is
> > > > no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be
> arrested.
> > > > There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything
> > political.
> > > In
> > > > Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can
> relax.
> > > You
> > > > know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong
> place
> > at
> > > > the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
> > > >
> > > > "When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of
> conversations
> > > > with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was
watching
> > > > television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the
> > second
> > > > part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving
> > Iraq
> > > > out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory
> if
> > > > daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard
> him.
> > > He
> > > > was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken
person.
> > > > Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish
into
> an
> > > > Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
> > > >
> > > > You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed
> > > approximately
> > > > one million of his own citizens since 1979.
> > > >
> > > > "Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and
Sunnis.
> > > There
> > > > were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign
> against
> > > the
> > > > Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed,
and
> > > about
> > > > 100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to
a
> > > > million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre
> was
> > > in
> > > > the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000
> > Shi'ites
> > > > in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous
massacres
> > > > against communists over the past two decades.
> > > >
> > > > "The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A
> > > million
> > > > Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million
Iraqis
> > > died
> > > > of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were
> killed
> > in
> > > > the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally
> > > displaced,
> > > > and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten
> > percent
> > > > of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule
of
> > > > Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an
> > accident.
> > > It
> > > > is systematic."
> > > >
> > > > What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
> > > >
> > > > "The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of
> > Mussolini
> > > > and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
> > > > supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated
> > themselves
> > > > from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and
> > > American
> > > > imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and
> anti-imperialist,
> > > and
> > > > it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is
> explained
> > > > through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general,
and
> > > Iraq,
> > > > in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and
the
> > > > natural leader of Arab unity."
> > > >
> > > > So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
> > > >
> > > > "Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of
ruling
> a
> > > > united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East
and
> > > West.
> > > > Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be
strong
> > Arab
> > > > fighters."
> > > >
> > > > Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
> > > >
> > > > "Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather
of
> > > > pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders
of
> > the
> > > > Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the
> real
> > > > Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially
> during
> > > the
> > > > Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they
> loaded
> > > > their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the
> Zionists,
> > > they
> > > > said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the
> > > Arabs.
> > > > `We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind
of
> > > > spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
> > > > Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold
against
> > > > Islam."
> > > >
> > > > Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
> > > >
> > > > "Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies,
the
> > same
> > > > conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in
> the
> > > name
> > > > of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned
> climate
> > of
> > > > Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam
> is
> > > not
> > > > an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror
> organizations,
> > I
> > > > would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between
> > Iraq
> > > > and Al Qaeda.
> > > >
> > > > "I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the
footsteps
> > of
> > > > Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was
> trying
> > > to
> > > > strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put
> > `Allah
> > > > Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed
> > different
> > > > Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world.
There
> is
> > a
> > > > terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according
> to
> > > the
> > > > Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries
> were
> > > > being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use
> > > chemical
> > > > weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are
> two
> > > > trees growing in the same soil."
> > > >
> > > > So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
> > > > distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush
has
> > > > proclaimed.
> > > >
> > > > "American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes.
Firstly,
> it
> > > was
> > > > a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for
> > > example,
> > > > about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge
mistake
> > not
> > > > to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared
> > > democracy
> > > > in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
> > > > strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
> > > >
> > > > "With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in
the
> > > Middle
> > > > East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a
> > > mistake
> > > > of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the
> > > mistakes
> > > > it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
> > > > democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden
grew
> > out
> > > > of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
> > > >
> > > > What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street,
and
> > what
> > > > kind of affect could it have to topple him?
> > > >
> > > > "The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and
> > Islamic
> > > > world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
> > > > uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This
> > would
> > > > give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a
lot
> > of
> > > > very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf
states
> > > would
> > > > be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a
> pan-Arabist,
> > > > anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the
> tradition
> > > of
> > > > the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations
like
> > the
> > > > Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization.
He
> > is
> > > > paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and
> indirectly
> > > > responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
> > > >
> > > > What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
> > > >
> > > > "Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to
> Iraq
> > > > since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which
was
> a
> > > huge
> > > > mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the
> > security
> > > > apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within
the
> > > > Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements
should
> > be
> > > > isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
> > > > security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against
> > others
> > > > who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq
> in
> > > the
> > > > next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or
> > biological
> > > > attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think,
would
> > be
> > > > another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
> > > >
> > > > What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to
make
> > the
> > > > distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting
> > something
> > > > completely new and democratic?
> > > >
> > > > "In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public
uprising.
> > > They
> > > > hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam
> > Hussein
> > > > and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
> > > > apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam
has
> > > been
> > > > trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
> > > > influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are
> > > carried
> > > > out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one
> can
> > > > threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling
> Iraq.
> > > The
> > > > hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or
Richard
> > > > Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just
> change
> > > > someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If
> > they
> > > > really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
> > > >
> > > > "Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that
> people
> > > > cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a
> possibility
> > is
> > > > created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They
will
> > > > uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling
> > > regime;
> > > > you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think
> > about
> > > > what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy,
> > which
> > > is
> > > > a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region.
Iraq
> > > > considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all
the
> > > > different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
> > > >
> > > > "So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to
> > > creating
> > > > a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect
> other
> > > > countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is:
Do
> > the
> > > > Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran
> and
> > > > Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich
> > > country
> > > > and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
> > > >
> > > > Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as
a
> > > > democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split
> off
> > > > legitimate?
> > > >
> > > > "Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you
> already
> > > have
> > > > a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you
> have
> > a
> > > > tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never
wanted
> to
> > > > split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq
> > with
> > > > strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split
off.
> > > > Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite
> are
> > > the
> > > > majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From
my
> > > > experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are
attracted
> > by
> > > > the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition,
> > > mainly
> > > > in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and
> > > strongest
> > > > communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been
strongly
> > > > repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
> > > >
> > > > "I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
> > > > Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized
> internationally.
> > It
> > > > is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions
> > against
> > > > Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government.
Turkey,
> > Iran
> > > > and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under
> these
> > > dire
> > > > circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not
really
> a
> > > > democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal
> and
> > > > free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of
> > speech,
> > > > up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
> > > > leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call
it
> > > > paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds
are
> > > able
> > > > to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
> > > >
> > > > Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
> > > >
> > > > "Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially
> until
> > we
> > > > know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to
> > > consider
> > > > that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for
30
> > > years,
> > > > Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam
Hussein
> > is
> > > > conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It
is
> > hard
> > > > to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years
like
> > the
> > > > Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and
because
> of
> > > > international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are
really
> > > ready
> > > > to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very
> good
> > > for
> > > > the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the
> one
> > in
> > > > 1991, then I am against it, too.
> > > >
> > > > "At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign
> against
> > > > Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because
the
> > > > regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now
there
> > are
> > > > tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security
> > > forces
> > > > come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and
> you.
> > > Five
> > > > hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons
are
> > > > overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000
> to
> > > > 700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
> > > >
> > > > "So the question is: Are they really ready to support
democracy
> in
> > > the
> > > > Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or
> do
> > > they
> > > > just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I
> > oppose
> > > > this war very much."
> > > >
> > > > During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating
> > after
> > > > the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is
attacked
> > this
> > > > time?
> > > >
> > > > "Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the
> Americans.
> > If
> > > > the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the
> leaders,
> > > on
> > > > the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on
> the
> > > > Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this
point:
> > > This
> > > > is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in
> fighting
> > > > Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking
> > > civilians.
> > > > There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with
> > weapons
> > > of
> > > > mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the
> > > democratization
> > > > of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition
and
> > > > against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it
> should
> > > only
> > > > be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is
> not
> > > > conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to
> > support
> > > a
> > > > multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and
only
> > > > hostile to this government."
> > > >
> > > > What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in
> > > liberated
> > > > Kurdistan?
> > > >
> > > > "The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the
> > Kurds,
> > > > but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still,
> > people
> > > > know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive
> > attitude
> > > > toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
> > > > television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In
> > Syria,
> > > > people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in
> > > Kurdistan,
> > > > people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World
> Trade
> > > > Center attack.
> > > >
> > > > "In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all
> taught
> > in
> > > > Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy,
> > blood-suckers,
> > > > part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
> > > > sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes,
there
> > are
> > > > some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy
> > > theory.
> > > > In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
> > > > immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the
Jewish
> > > > community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying
that
> > it
> > > > was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that
the
> > > Jewish
> > > > heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
> > > >
> > > > "Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week,
> > Saddam
> > > > Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is
> the
> > > > Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The
> same
> > > > thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
> > > > nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
> > > > themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured
> and
> > > > killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different
> attitude
> > > > toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
> > > > intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel
than
> > > other
> > > > Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much
more
> > than
> > > > they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to
work
> > with
> > > a
> > > > future Iraqi government than with any other government in the
region.
> If
> > > the
> > > > Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
> > > > anti-Jewish sentiment."
> > > >
> > > > What do you think drives German policy against U.S.
intervention
> > in
> > > > Iraq?
> > > >
> > > > "Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One
should
> > not
> > > > forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of
the
> > > Scud
> > > > missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German
> > assistance,
> > > > Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own
> people
> > in
> > > > Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran,
> > Libya
> > > > and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany.
> > > German
> > > > policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from
> trade
> > > with
> > > > Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of
Iraq.
> > > >
> > > > "Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as
during
> > the
> > > > last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on
the
> > > > anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain
> German
> > > > ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War
I
> > and
> > > > escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward,
> > which
> > > > has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies:
> > America,
> > > > the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very
> > > strong
> > > > in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
> > > >
> > > > "Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible
> > > dictator
> > > > murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him,
and
> > > people
> > > > blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle
> East,
> > > not
> > > > Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the
> > region.
> > > > Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
> > > > especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The
> > majority
> > > of
> > > > people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were
tremendous
> > > > demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because
> > > Germany
> > > > is stronger.
> > > >
> > > > "Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy,
> > which
> > > > in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself
to
> > the
> > > > U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
> > > > opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an
attempt
> > to
> > > > tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq.
> Also,
> > > the
> > > > Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they
tell
> > > about
> > > > the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq
and
> a
> > > lot
> > > > of German enterprises."
> > > >
> > > > So both the left and the right in Germany have strong
> > anti-American
> > > > feeling?
> > > >
> > > > "Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment,
you
> > can
> > > > hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far
> left
> > > > wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he
is
> > > > fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German
> > battle.
> > > > And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think
> that
> > > > Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is
> > > fighting
> > > > for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the
left
> > say
> > > > that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve
> any
> > > > problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should
> oppose
> > > it.
> > > > This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
> > > >
> > > > The European and Third World left have developed an ideology
> that
> > > > unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling
and,
> to
> > a
> > > > certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind
this
> > > > combination?
> > > >
> > > > "This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
> > > > attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
> > > > anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial
> > capital
> > > > and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea
was
> > > later
> > > > adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
> > > > identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does
not
> > > > criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the
surface
> > > > [aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly
capitalists -
> > is
> > > > automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not
> > > speaking
> > > > about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization
> > rhetoric
> > > > is about.
> > > >
> > > > "These associations are so deeply written inside European and
> > > > especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
> > > > mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain
> Leninist
> > > > groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is
> > more
> > > or
> > > > less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question
of
> > > > whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or
> whether
> > > the
> > > > government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989,
> > anti-Semitism
> > > > and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space
on
> > the
> > > > left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were
hidden
> in
> > > the
> > > > signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
> > > > international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these
ideas
> > can
> > > > be found in the mainstream.
> > > >
> > > > "So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the
> > '20s:
> > > > There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are
fighting
> > > > against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge
American
> > > > trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt
a
> > > > universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the
> > > purveyors
> > > > of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been
> > > forgotten.
> > > > These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in
> the
> > > > Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since
> > > September
> > > > 11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians
> and
> > > > Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and
> > Britain
> > > > on the other."
> > > >
> > > > Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a
> Marxist,
> > > see
> > > > as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S.
as
> > the
> > > > purveyor of global capitalism?
> > > >
> > > > "The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together
> > Hamas,
> > > > Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the
> Balkans,
> > > the
> > > > Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very
active
> > in
> > > > the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
> > > > universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
> > > > anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
> > > > barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism
or
> > > > barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I
> think
> > > the
> > > > fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to
> be
> > > its
> > > > successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of
the
> > > > Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew
> out
> > > of
> > > > the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They
> didn't
> > > fall
> > > > from the moon.
> > > >
> > > > "But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which
> > means
> > > > in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its
> own
> > > > creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better
> > world.
> > > > The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very
> > important -
> > > > issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a
very
> > > small
> > > > minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with
the
> > > > Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything.
> > They
> > > > are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of
> > emancipation.
> > > >
> > > > "In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the
> > '30s.
> > > > On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews
are
> > > always
> > > > in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting
> for
> > a
> > > > capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National
Socialist,
> > > > self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In
> 1939,
> > > the
> > > > Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
> > > > self-determination in the Third World. They had a very
> anti-colonialist
> > > > phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are
> > being
> > > > used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and
> the
> > > > Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
> > > > position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
> > > >
> > > > "Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of
the
> > > U.S.,
> > > > supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is
signaling
> > that
> > > > it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in
> the
> > > > Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany
> is
> > > > being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So
> people
> > > > understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is
quite
> > > > interesting - and quite horrifying."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> + tripe .^`` X333CV/^
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, marc.garrett wrote:
> Does that mean that I am wanking in your face?
No it means you're masturbating in your pants while dying.
Typical victim pose.
`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42
Scary!
Wally - er, are you an artist or an FBI fag, I cannot believe what you are
saying. It's like the age of enlightenment never happened. Not in your neck
of the woods, anyway…
marc
> For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from marching on
to
> Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the miserable
> deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists who
> oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the tens of
> thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
> dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed on the
> establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by annihilating
the
> Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the long-term
> aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
>
>
> ========================================
>
>
>
> Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time: 01:32
> (GMT+3)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Interview / Vicious circles closing in
>
> By Micha Odenheimer
>
>
>
>
>
> Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and dangerous
> elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
>
> A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas von der
> Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on human
> rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent eight
> months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country just
> after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992, Von der
> Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called Wadi,
> operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved out
for
> Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi refugees in
> Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has founded
the
> first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in helping
> the local government reform the prison system that has been left over from
> Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and works
> closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
>
> Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German magazines
such
> as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
> "Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He is
one
> of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on the left
> who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing critique
> of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his other
> activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
> German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German literature
> department at the University of Frankfurt.
>
> This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
> ======================================================
>
> When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just
another
> Middle East dictatorship?
>
> Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very quickly
> realized that I could not compare the situation there to other Middle
> Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This country
> was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the Shi'ite
> area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks after
the
> uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the city. The
> majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the market.
> There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
>
> "People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified that
> their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
> services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four months to
> learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie down in
> the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed everyone
> who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It was
> forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or
70,000
> people were killed in this area in 1991.
>
> "The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed was to
> repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
> bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the south
> was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam said
> before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people, not
> really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could not
> continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
>
> What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
>
> "Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often - for a
good
> dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make a
phone
> call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is so
> palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a
dictatorship,
> but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If there
is
> no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be arrested.
> There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything political.
In
> Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can relax.
You
> know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong place at
> the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
>
> "When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of conversations
> with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was watching
> television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the second
> part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving Iraq
> out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory if
> daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard him.
He
> was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken person.
> Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish into an
> Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
>
> You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed
approximately
> one million of his own citizens since 1979.
>
> "Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and Sunnis.
There
> were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign against
the
> Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed, and
about
> 100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to a
> million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre was
in
> the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000 Shi'ites
> in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous massacres
> against communists over the past two decades.
>
> "The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A
million
> Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million Iraqis
died
> of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were killed in
> the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally
displaced,
> and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten percent
> of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule of
> Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an accident.
It
> is systematic."
>
> What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
>
> "The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of Mussolini
> and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
> supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated themselves
> from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and
American
> imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and anti-imperialist,
and
> it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is explained
> through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general, and
Iraq,
> in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and the
> natural leader of Arab unity."
>
> So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
>
> "Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of ruling a
> united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East and
West.
> Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be strong Arab
> fighters."
>
> Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
>
> "Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather of
> pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders of the
> Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the real
> Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially during
the
> Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they loaded
> their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the Zionists,
they
> said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the
Arabs.
> `We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind of
> spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
> Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold against
> Islam."
>
> Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
>
> "Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies, the same
> conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in the
name
> of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned climate of
> Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam is
not
> an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror organizations, I
> would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between Iraq
> and Al Qaeda.
>
> "I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the footsteps of
> Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was trying
to
> strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put `Allah
> Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed different
> Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world. There is a
> terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according to
the
> Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries were
> being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use
chemical
> weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are two
> trees growing in the same soil."
>
> So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
> distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush has
> proclaimed.
>
> "American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes. Firstly, it
was
> a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for
example,
> about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge mistake not
> to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared
democracy
> in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
> strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
>
> "With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in the
Middle
> East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a
mistake
> of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the
mistakes
> it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
> democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out
> of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
>
> What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street, and what
> kind of affect could it have to topple him?
>
> "The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and Islamic
> world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
> uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This would
> give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a lot of
> very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states
would
> be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a pan-Arabist,
> anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the tradition
of
> the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations like the
> Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization. He is
> paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and indirectly
> responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
>
> What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
>
> "Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to Iraq
> since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which was a
huge
> mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the security
> apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within the
> Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements should be
> isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
> security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against others
> who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq in
the
> next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or biological
> attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think, would be
> another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
>
> What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to make the
> distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting something
> completely new and democratic?
>
> "In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public uprising.
They
> hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam Hussein
> and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
> apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam has
been
> trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
> influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are
carried
> out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one can
> threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling Iraq.
The
> hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or Richard
> Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just change
> someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If they
> really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
>
> "Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that people
> cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a possibility is
> created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They will
> uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling
regime;
> you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think about
> what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy, which
is
> a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region. Iraq
> considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all the
> different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
>
> "So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to
creating
> a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect other
> countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is: Do the
> Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran and
> Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich
country
> and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
>
> Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as a
> democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split off
> legitimate?
>
> "Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you already
have
> a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you have a
> tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never wanted to
> split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq with
> strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split off.
> Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite are
the
> majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From my
> experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are attracted by
> the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition,
mainly
> in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and
strongest
> communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been strongly
> repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
>
> "I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
> Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized internationally. It
> is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions against
> Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government. Turkey, Iran
> and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under these
dire
> circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not really a
> democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal and
> free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of speech,
> up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
> leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call it
> paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds are
able
> to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
>
> Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
>
> "Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially until we
> know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to
consider
> that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for 30
years,
> Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam Hussein is
> conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It is hard
> to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years like the
> Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and because of
> international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are really
ready
> to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very good
for
> the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the one in
> 1991, then I am against it, too.
>
> "At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign against
> Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because the
> regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now there are
> tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security
forces
> come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and you.
Five
> hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons are
> overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000 to
> 700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
>
> "So the question is: Are they really ready to support democracy in
the
> Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or do
they
> just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I oppose
> this war very much."
>
> During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating after
> the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is attacked this
> time?
>
> "Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the Americans. If
> the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the leaders,
on
> the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on the
> Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this point:
This
> is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in fighting
> Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking
civilians.
> There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with weapons
of
> mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the
democratization
> of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition and
> against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it should
only
> be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is not
> conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to support
a
> multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and only
> hostile to this government."
>
> What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in
liberated
> Kurdistan?
>
> "The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the Kurds,
> but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still, people
> know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive attitude
> toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
> television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In Syria,
> people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in
Kurdistan,
> people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World Trade
> Center attack.
>
> "In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all taught in
> Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy, blood-suckers,
> part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
> sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes, there are
> some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy
theory.
> In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
> immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the Jewish
> community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying that it
> was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that the
Jewish
> heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
>
> "Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week, Saddam
> Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is the
> Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The same
> thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
> nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
> themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured and
> killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different attitude
> toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
> intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel than
other
> Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much more than
> they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to work with
a
> future Iraqi government than with any other government in the region. If
the
> Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
> anti-Jewish sentiment."
>
> What do you think drives German policy against U.S. intervention in
> Iraq?
>
> "Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One should not
> forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of the
Scud
> missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German assistance,
> Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own people in
> Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran, Libya
> and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany.
German
> policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from trade
with
> Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of Iraq.
>
> "Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as during the
> last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on the
> anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain German
> ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War I and
> escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward, which
> has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies: America,
> the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very
strong
> in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
>
> "Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible
dictator
> murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him, and
people
> blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle East,
not
> Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the region.
> Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
> especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The majority
of
> people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were tremendous
> demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because
Germany
> is stronger.
>
> "Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy, which
> in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself to the
> U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
> opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an attempt to
> tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq. Also,
the
> Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they tell
about
> the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq and a
lot
> of German enterprises."
>
> So both the left and the right in Germany have strong anti-American
> feeling?
>
> "Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment, you can
> hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far left
> wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he is
> fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German battle.
> And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think that
> Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is
fighting
> for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the left say
> that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve any
> problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should oppose
it.
> This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
>
> The European and Third World left have developed an ideology that
> unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling and, to a
> certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind this
> combination?
>
> "This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
> attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
> anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial capital
> and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea was
later
> adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
> identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does not
> criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the surface
> [aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly capitalists - is
> automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not
speaking
> about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization rhetoric
> is about.
>
> "These associations are so deeply written inside European and
> especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
> mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain Leninist
> groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is more
or
> less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question of
> whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or whether
the
> government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989, anti-Semitism
> and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space on the
> left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were hidden in
the
> signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
> international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these ideas can
> be found in the mainstream.
>
> "So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the '20s:
> There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are fighting
> against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge American
> trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt a
> universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the
purveyors
> of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been
forgotten.
> These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in the
> Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since
September
> 11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians and
> Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and Britain
> on the other."
>
> Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a Marxist,
see
> as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S. as the
> purveyor of global capitalism?
>
> "The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together Hamas,
> Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the Balkans,
the
> Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very active in
> the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
> universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
> anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
> barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism or
> barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I think
the
> fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to be
its
> successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of the
> Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out
of
> the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They didn't
fall
> from the moon.
>
> "But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which means
> in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its own
> creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better world.
> The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very important -
> issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a very
small
> minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with the
> Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything. They
> are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of emancipation.
>
> "In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the '30s.
> On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews are
always
> in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting for a
> capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National Socialist,
> self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In 1939,
the
> Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
> self-determination in the Third World. They had a very anti-colonialist
> phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are being
> used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and the
> Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
> position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
>
> "Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of the
U.S.,
> supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is signaling that
> it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in the
> Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany is
> being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So people
> understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is quite
> interesting - and quite horrifying."
>
>
>
—– Original Message —–
From: "furtherfield" <[email protected]>
> Scary!
>
> Wally - er, are you an artist or an FBI fag,
What an incredibly stupid remark. Is that what you call discourse,
arguement, dialogue? I've published and exhibited, so what does that make
me?
> I cannot believe what you are
> saying.
Perhaps that is because you have your head stuck somewhere and are incapable
of reading AND comprehending. I happen to regard Thomas von der
Osten-Sacken"s caveats seriously. He has been there. He is a humanitarian.
Similar to George Orwell, he is a leftist critical of leftists.
> It's like the age of enlightenment never happened. Not in your neck
> of the woods, anyway…
Obviously, you are unable to see that hand-wringing tut-tut is a cause of
much death. Read the article and tell me that the deaths in Iraq did not
happen. Tell me that those deaths could not have been preventable. Or
perhaps you are a Saddam sucker, and you haven't a single clue about how to
make Iraq safe for the Iraqi people or perhaps you couldn;t care less about
THOSE people.
> > For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from marching
on
> to
> > Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the miserable
> > deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists who
> > oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the tens
of
> > thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
> > dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed on
the
> > establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by annihilating
> the
> > Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the long-term
> > aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
> >
> >
> > ========================================
> >
> > Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time: 01:32
> > (GMT+3)
> >
> > Interview / Vicious circles closing in
> > By Micha Odenheimer
> >
> > Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and
dangerous
> > elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
> >
> > A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas von
der
> > Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on human
> > rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent eight
> > months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country just
> > after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992, Von
der
> > Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called Wadi,
> > operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved out
> for
> > Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi refugees in
> > Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has founded
> the
> > first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in
helping
> > the local government reform the prison system that has been left over
from
> > Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and works
> > closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
> >
> > Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German magazines
> such
> > as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
> > "Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He is
> one
> > of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on the
left
> > who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing
critique
> > of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his other
> > activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
> > German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German
literature
> > department at the University of Frankfurt.
> >
> > This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
> > ======================================================
> >
> > When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just
> another
> > Middle East dictatorship?
> >
> > Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very quickly
> > realized that I could not compare the situation there to other Middle
> > Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This
country
> > was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the
Shi'ite
> > area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks after
> the
> > uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the city.
The
> > majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the market.
> > There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
> >
> > "People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified that
> > their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
> > services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four months to
> > learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie down
in
> > the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed
everyone
> > who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It was
> > forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or
> 70,000
> > people were killed in this area in 1991.
> >
> > "The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed was
to
> > repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
> > bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the
south
> > was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam
said
> > before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people, not
> > really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could not
> > continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
> >
> > What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
> >
> > "Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often - for a
> good
> > dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make a
> phone
> > call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is so
> > palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a
> dictatorship,
> > but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If there
> is
> > no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be arrested.
> > There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything
political.
> In
> > Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can relax.
> You
> > know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong place
at
> > the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
> >
> > "When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of conversations
> > with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was watching
> > television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the
second
> > part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving
Iraq
> > out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory if
> > daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard him.
> He
> > was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken person.
> > Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish into an
> > Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
> >
> > You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed
> approximately
> > one million of his own citizens since 1979.
> >
> > "Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and Sunnis.
> There
> > were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign against
> the
> > Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed, and
> about
> > 100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to a
> > million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre was
> in
> > the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000
Shi'ites
> > in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous massacres
> > against communists over the past two decades.
> >
> > "The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A
> million
> > Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million Iraqis
> died
> > of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were killed
in
> > the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally
> displaced,
> > and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten
percent
> > of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule of
> > Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an
accident.
> It
> > is systematic."
> >
> > What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
> >
> > "The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of
Mussolini
> > and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
> > supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated
themselves
> > from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and
> American
> > imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and anti-imperialist,
> and
> > it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is explained
> > through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general, and
> Iraq,
> > in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and the
> > natural leader of Arab unity."
> >
> > So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
> >
> > "Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of ruling a
> > united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East and
> West.
> > Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be strong
Arab
> > fighters."
> >
> > Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
> >
> > "Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather of
> > pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders of
the
> > Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the real
> > Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially during
> the
> > Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they loaded
> > their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the Zionists,
> they
> > said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the
> Arabs.
> > `We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind of
> > spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
> > Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold against
> > Islam."
> >
> > Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
> >
> > "Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies, the
same
> > conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in the
> name
> > of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned climate
of
> > Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam is
> not
> > an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror organizations,
I
> > would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between
Iraq
> > and Al Qaeda.
> >
> > "I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the footsteps
of
> > Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was trying
> to
> > strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put
`Allah
> > Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed
different
> > Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world. There is
a
> > terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according to
> the
> > Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries were
> > being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use
> chemical
> > weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are two
> > trees growing in the same soil."
> >
> > So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
> > distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush has
> > proclaimed.
> >
> > "American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes. Firstly, it
> was
> > a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for
> example,
> > about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge mistake
not
> > to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared
> democracy
> > in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
> > strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
> >
> > "With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in the
> Middle
> > East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a
> mistake
> > of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the
> mistakes
> > it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
> > democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew
out
> > of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
> >
> > What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street, and
what
> > kind of affect could it have to topple him?
> >
> > "The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and
Islamic
> > world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
> > uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This
would
> > give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a lot
of
> > very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states
> would
> > be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a pan-Arabist,
> > anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the tradition
> of
> > the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations like
the
> > Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization. He
is
> > paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and indirectly
> > responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
> >
> > What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
> >
> > "Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to Iraq
> > since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which was a
> huge
> > mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the
security
> > apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within the
> > Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements should
be
> > isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
> > security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against
others
> > who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq in
> the
> > next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or
biological
> > attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think, would
be
> > another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
> >
> > What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to make
the
> > distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting
something
> > completely new and democratic?
> >
> > "In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public uprising.
> They
> > hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam
Hussein
> > and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
> > apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam has
> been
> > trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
> > influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are
> carried
> > out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one can
> > threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling Iraq.
> The
> > hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or Richard
> > Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just change
> > someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If
they
> > really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
> >
> > "Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that people
> > cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a possibility
is
> > created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They will
> > uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling
> regime;
> > you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think
about
> > what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy,
which
> is
> > a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region. Iraq
> > considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all the
> > different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
> >
> > "So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to
> creating
> > a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect other
> > countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is: Do
the
> > Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran and
> > Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich
> country
> > and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
> >
> > Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as a
> > democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split off
> > legitimate?
> >
> > "Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you already
> have
> > a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you have
a
> > tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never wanted to
> > split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq
with
> > strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split off.
> > Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite are
> the
> > majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From my
> > experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are attracted
by
> > the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition,
> mainly
> > in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and
> strongest
> > communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been strongly
> > repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
> >
> > "I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
> > Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized internationally.
It
> > is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions
against
> > Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government. Turkey,
Iran
> > and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under these
> dire
> > circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not really a
> > democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal and
> > free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of
speech,
> > up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
> > leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call it
> > paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds are
> able
> > to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
> >
> > Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
> >
> > "Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially until
we
> > know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to
> consider
> > that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for 30
> years,
> > Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam Hussein
is
> > conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It is
hard
> > to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years like
the
> > Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and because of
> > international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are really
> ready
> > to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very good
> for
> > the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the one
in
> > 1991, then I am against it, too.
> >
> > "At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign against
> > Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because the
> > regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now there
are
> > tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security
> forces
> > come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and you.
> Five
> > hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons are
> > overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000 to
> > 700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
> >
> > "So the question is: Are they really ready to support democracy in
> the
> > Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or do
> they
> > just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I
oppose
> > this war very much."
> >
> > During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating
after
> > the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is attacked
this
> > time?
> >
> > "Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the Americans.
If
> > the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the leaders,
> on
> > the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on the
> > Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this point:
> This
> > is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in fighting
> > Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking
> civilians.
> > There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with
weapons
> of
> > mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the
> democratization
> > of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition and
> > against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it should
> only
> > be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is not
> > conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to
support
> a
> > multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and only
> > hostile to this government."
> >
> > What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in
> liberated
> > Kurdistan?
> >
> > "The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the
Kurds,
> > but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still,
people
> > know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive
attitude
> > toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
> > television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In
Syria,
> > people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in
> Kurdistan,
> > people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World Trade
> > Center attack.
> >
> > "In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all taught
in
> > Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy,
blood-suckers,
> > part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
> > sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes, there
are
> > some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy
> theory.
> > In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
> > immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the Jewish
> > community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying that
it
> > was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that the
> Jewish
> > heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
> >
> > "Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week,
Saddam
> > Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is the
> > Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The same
> > thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
> > nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
> > themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured and
> > killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different attitude
> > toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
> > intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel than
> other
> > Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much more
than
> > they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to work
with
> a
> > future Iraqi government than with any other government in the region. If
> the
> > Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
> > anti-Jewish sentiment."
> >
> > What do you think drives German policy against U.S. intervention
in
> > Iraq?
> >
> > "Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One should
not
> > forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of the
> Scud
> > missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German
assistance,
> > Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own people
in
> > Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran,
Libya
> > and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany.
> German
> > policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from trade
> with
> > Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of Iraq.
> >
> > "Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as during
the
> > last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on the
> > anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain German
> > ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War I
and
> > escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward,
which
> > has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies:
America,
> > the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very
> strong
> > in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
> >
> > "Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible
> dictator
> > murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him, and
> people
> > blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle East,
> not
> > Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the
region.
> > Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
> > especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The
majority
> of
> > people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were tremendous
> > demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because
> Germany
> > is stronger.
> >
> > "Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy,
which
> > in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself to
the
> > U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
> > opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an attempt
to
> > tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq. Also,
> the
> > Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they tell
> about
> > the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq and a
> lot
> > of German enterprises."
> >
> > So both the left and the right in Germany have strong
anti-American
> > feeling?
> >
> > "Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment, you
can
> > hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far left
> > wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he is
> > fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German
battle.
> > And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think that
> > Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is
> fighting
> > for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the left
say
> > that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve any
> > problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should oppose
> it.
> > This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
> >
> > The European and Third World left have developed an ideology that
> > unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling and, to
a
> > certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind this
> > combination?
> >
> > "This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
> > attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
> > anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial
capital
> > and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea was
> later
> > adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
> > identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does not
> > criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the surface
> > [aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly capitalists -
is
> > automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not
> speaking
> > about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization
rhetoric
> > is about.
> >
> > "These associations are so deeply written inside European and
> > especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
> > mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain Leninist
> > groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is
more
> or
> > less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question of
> > whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or whether
> the
> > government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989,
anti-Semitism
> > and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space on
the
> > left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were hidden in
> the
> > signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
> > international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these ideas
can
> > be found in the mainstream.
> >
> > "So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the
'20s:
> > There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are fighting
> > against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge American
> > trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt a
> > universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the
> purveyors
> > of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been
> forgotten.
> > These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in the
> > Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since
> September
> > 11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians and
> > Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and
Britain
> > on the other."
> >
> > Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a Marxist,
> see
> > as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S. as
the
> > purveyor of global capitalism?
> >
> > "The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together
Hamas,
> > Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the Balkans,
> the
> > Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very active
in
> > the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
> > universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
> > anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
> > barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism or
> > barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I think
> the
> > fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to be
> its
> > successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of the
> > Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out
> of
> > the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They didn't
> fall
> > from the moon.
> >
> > "But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which
means
> > in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its own
> > creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better
world.
> > The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very
important -
> > issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a very
> small
> > minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with the
> > Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything.
They
> > are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of
emancipation.
> >
> > "In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the
'30s.
> > On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews are
> always
> > in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting for
a
> > capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National Socialist,
> > self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In 1939,
> the
> > Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
> > self-determination in the Third World. They had a very anti-colonialist
> > phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are
being
> > used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and the
> > Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
> > position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
> >
> > "Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of the
> U.S.,
> > supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is signaling
that
> > it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in the
> > Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany is
> > being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So people
> > understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is quite
> > interesting - and quite horrifying."
> >
> >
> >
>
>
I didn't know discourse was allowed any more in the states - but I am
reassured by your need for it.
marc
>
> —– Original Message —–
> From: "furtherfield" <[email protected]>
> > Scary!
> >
> > Wally - er, are you an artist or an FBI fag,
>
> What an incredibly stupid remark. Is that what you call discourse,
> arguement, dialogue? I've published and exhibited, so what does that make
> me?
>
> > I cannot believe what you are
> > saying.
>
> Perhaps that is because you have your head stuck somewhere and are
incapable
> of reading AND comprehending. I happen to regard Thomas von der
> Osten-Sacken"s caveats seriously. He has been there. He is a humanitarian.
> Similar to George Orwell, he is a leftist critical of leftists.
>
> > It's like the age of enlightenment never happened. Not in your neck
> > of the woods, anyway…
>
> Obviously, you are unable to see that hand-wringing tut-tut is a cause of
> much death. Read the article and tell me that the deaths in Iraq did not
> happen. Tell me that those deaths could not have been preventable. Or
> perhaps you are a Saddam sucker, and you haven't a single clue about how
to
> make Iraq safe for the Iraqi people or perhaps you couldn;t care less
about
> THOSE people.
>
> > > For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from marching
> on
> > to
> > > Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the miserable
> > > deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists
who
> > > oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the
tens
> of
> > > thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
> > > dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed on
> the
> > > establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by
annihilating
> > the
> > > Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the
long-term
> > > aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
> > >
> > >
> > > ========================================
> > >
> > > Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time: 01:32
> > > (GMT+3)
> > >
> > > Interview / Vicious circles closing in
> > > By Micha Odenheimer
> > >
> > > Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and
> dangerous
> > > elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
> > >
> > > A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas von
> der
> > > Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on
human
> > > rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent
eight
> > > months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country
just
> > > after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992, Von
> der
> > > Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called Wadi,
> > > operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved
out
> > for
> > > Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi refugees
in
> > > Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has
founded
> > the
> > > first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in
> helping
> > > the local government reform the prison system that has been left over
> from
> > > Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and works
> > > closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
> > >
> > > Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German magazines
> > such
> > > as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
> > > "Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He
is
> > one
> > > of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on the
> left
> > > who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing
> critique
> > > of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his other
> > > activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
> > > German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German
> literature
> > > department at the University of Frankfurt.
> > >
> > > This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
> > > ======================================================
> > >
> > > When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just
> > another
> > > Middle East dictatorship?
> > >
> > > Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very quickly
> > > realized that I could not compare the situation there to other Middle
> > > Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This
> country
> > > was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the
> Shi'ite
> > > area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks
after
> > the
> > > uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the city.
> The
> > > majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the
market.
> > > There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
> > >
> > > "People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified
that
> > > their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
> > > services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four months
to
> > > learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie down
> in
> > > the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed
> everyone
> > > who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It was
> > > forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or
> > 70,000
> > > people were killed in this area in 1991.
> > >
> > > "The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed
was
> to
> > > repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
> > > bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the
> south
> > > was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam
> said
> > > before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people,
not
> > > really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could not
> > > continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
> > >
> > > What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
> > >
> > > "Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often - for
a
> > good
> > > dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make a
> > phone
> > > call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is so
> > > palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a
> > dictatorship,
> > > but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If
there
> > is
> > > no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be
arrested.
> > > There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything
> political.
> > In
> > > Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can
relax.
> > You
> > > know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong
place
> at
> > > the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
> > >
> > > "When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of
conversations
> > > with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was watching
> > > television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the
> second
> > > part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving
> Iraq
> > > out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory
if
> > > daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard
him.
> > He
> > > was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken person.
> > > Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish into
an
> > > Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
> > >
> > > You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed
> > approximately
> > > one million of his own citizens since 1979.
> > >
> > > "Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and Sunnis.
> > There
> > > were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign
against
> > the
> > > Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed, and
> > about
> > > 100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to a
> > > million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre
was
> > in
> > > the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000
> Shi'ites
> > > in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous massacres
> > > against communists over the past two decades.
> > >
> > > "The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A
> > million
> > > Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million Iraqis
> > died
> > > of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were
killed
> in
> > > the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally
> > displaced,
> > > and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten
> percent
> > > of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule of
> > > Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an
> accident.
> > It
> > > is systematic."
> > >
> > > What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
> > >
> > > "The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of
> Mussolini
> > > and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
> > > supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated
> themselves
> > > from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and
> > American
> > > imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and
anti-imperialist,
> > and
> > > it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is
explained
> > > through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general, and
> > Iraq,
> > > in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and the
> > > natural leader of Arab unity."
> > >
> > > So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
> > >
> > > "Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of ruling
a
> > > united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East and
> > West.
> > > Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be strong
> Arab
> > > fighters."
> > >
> > > Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
> > >
> > > "Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather of
> > > pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders of
> the
> > > Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the
real
> > > Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially
during
> > the
> > > Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they
loaded
> > > their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the
Zionists,
> > they
> > > said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the
> > Arabs.
> > > `We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind of
> > > spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
> > > Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold against
> > > Islam."
> > >
> > > Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
> > >
> > > "Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies, the
> same
> > > conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in
the
> > name
> > > of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned
climate
> of
> > > Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam
is
> > not
> > > an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror
organizations,
> I
> > > would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between
> Iraq
> > > and Al Qaeda.
> > >
> > > "I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the footsteps
> of
> > > Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was
trying
> > to
> > > strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put
> `Allah
> > > Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed
> different
> > > Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world. There
is
> a
> > > terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according
to
> > the
> > > Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries
were
> > > being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use
> > chemical
> > > weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are
two
> > > trees growing in the same soil."
> > >
> > > So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
> > > distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush has
> > > proclaimed.
> > >
> > > "American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes. Firstly,
it
> > was
> > > a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for
> > example,
> > > about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge mistake
> not
> > > to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared
> > democracy
> > > in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
> > > strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
> > >
> > > "With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in the
> > Middle
> > > East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a
> > mistake
> > > of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the
> > mistakes
> > > it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
> > > democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew
> out
> > > of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
> > >
> > > What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street, and
> what
> > > kind of affect could it have to topple him?
> > >
> > > "The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and
> Islamic
> > > world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
> > > uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This
> would
> > > give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a lot
> of
> > > very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states
> > would
> > > be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a
pan-Arabist,
> > > anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the
tradition
> > of
> > > the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations like
> the
> > > Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization. He
> is
> > > paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and
indirectly
> > > responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
> > >
> > > What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
> > >
> > > "Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to
Iraq
> > > since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which was
a
> > huge
> > > mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the
> security
> > > apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within the
> > > Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements should
> be
> > > isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
> > > security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against
> others
> > > who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq
in
> > the
> > > next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or
> biological
> > > attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think, would
> be
> > > another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
> > >
> > > What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to make
> the
> > > distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting
> something
> > > completely new and democratic?
> > >
> > > "In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public uprising.
> > They
> > > hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam
> Hussein
> > > and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
> > > apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam has
> > been
> > > trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
> > > influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are
> > carried
> > > out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one
can
> > > threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling
Iraq.
> > The
> > > hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or Richard
> > > Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just
change
> > > someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If
> they
> > > really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
> > >
> > > "Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that
people
> > > cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a
possibility
> is
> > > created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They will
> > > uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling
> > regime;
> > > you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think
> about
> > > what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy,
> which
> > is
> > > a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region. Iraq
> > > considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all the
> > > different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
> > >
> > > "So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to
> > creating
> > > a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect
other
> > > countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is: Do
> the
> > > Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran
and
> > > Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich
> > country
> > > and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
> > >
> > > Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as a
> > > democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split
off
> > > legitimate?
> > >
> > > "Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you
already
> > have
> > > a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you
have
> a
> > > tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never wanted
to
> > > split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq
> with
> > > strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split off.
> > > Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite
are
> > the
> > > majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From my
> > > experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are attracted
> by
> > > the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition,
> > mainly
> > > in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and
> > strongest
> > > communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been strongly
> > > repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
> > >
> > > "I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
> > > Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized
internationally.
> It
> > > is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions
> against
> > > Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government. Turkey,
> Iran
> > > and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under
these
> > dire
> > > circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not really
a
> > > democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal
and
> > > free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of
> speech,
> > > up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
> > > leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call it
> > > paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds are
> > able
> > > to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
> > >
> > > Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
> > >
> > > "Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially
until
> we
> > > know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to
> > consider
> > > that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for 30
> > years,
> > > Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam Hussein
> is
> > > conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It is
> hard
> > > to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years like
> the
> > > Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and because
of
> > > international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are really
> > ready
> > > to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very
good
> > for
> > > the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the
one
> in
> > > 1991, then I am against it, too.
> > >
> > > "At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign
against
> > > Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because the
> > > regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now there
> are
> > > tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security
> > forces
> > > come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and
you.
> > Five
> > > hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons are
> > > overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000
to
> > > 700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
> > >
> > > "So the question is: Are they really ready to support democracy
in
> > the
> > > Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or
do
> > they
> > > just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I
> oppose
> > > this war very much."
> > >
> > > During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating
> after
> > > the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is attacked
> this
> > > time?
> > >
> > > "Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the
Americans.
> If
> > > the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the
leaders,
> > on
> > > the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on
the
> > > Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this point:
> > This
> > > is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in
fighting
> > > Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking
> > civilians.
> > > There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with
> weapons
> > of
> > > mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the
> > democratization
> > > of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition and
> > > against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it
should
> > only
> > > be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is
not
> > > conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to
> support
> > a
> > > multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and only
> > > hostile to this government."
> > >
> > > What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in
> > liberated
> > > Kurdistan?
> > >
> > > "The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the
> Kurds,
> > > but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still,
> people
> > > know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive
> attitude
> > > toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
> > > television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In
> Syria,
> > > people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in
> > Kurdistan,
> > > people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World
Trade
> > > Center attack.
> > >
> > > "In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all
taught
> in
> > > Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy,
> blood-suckers,
> > > part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
> > > sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes, there
> are
> > > some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy
> > theory.
> > > In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
> > > immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the Jewish
> > > community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying that
> it
> > > was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that the
> > Jewish
> > > heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
> > >
> > > "Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week,
> Saddam
> > > Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is
the
> > > Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The
same
> > > thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
> > > nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
> > > themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured
and
> > > killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different
attitude
> > > toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
> > > intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel than
> > other
> > > Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much more
> than
> > > they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to work
> with
> > a
> > > future Iraqi government than with any other government in the region.
If
> > the
> > > Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
> > > anti-Jewish sentiment."
> > >
> > > What do you think drives German policy against U.S. intervention
> in
> > > Iraq?
> > >
> > > "Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One should
> not
> > > forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of the
> > Scud
> > > missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German
> assistance,
> > > Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own
people
> in
> > > Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran,
> Libya
> > > and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany.
> > German
> > > policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from
trade
> > with
> > > Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of Iraq.
> > >
> > > "Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as during
> the
> > > last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on the
> > > anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain
German
> > > ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War I
> and
> > > escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward,
> which
> > > has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies:
> America,
> > > the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very
> > strong
> > > in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
> > >
> > > "Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible
> > dictator
> > > murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him, and
> > people
> > > blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle
East,
> > not
> > > Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the
> region.
> > > Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
> > > especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The
> majority
> > of
> > > people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were tremendous
> > > demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because
> > Germany
> > > is stronger.
> > >
> > > "Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy,
> which
> > > in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself to
> the
> > > U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
> > > opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an attempt
> to
> > > tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq.
Also,
> > the
> > > Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they tell
> > about
> > > the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq and
a
> > lot
> > > of German enterprises."
> > >
> > > So both the left and the right in Germany have strong
> anti-American
> > > feeling?
> > >
> > > "Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment, you
> can
> > > hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far
left
> > > wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he is
> > > fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German
> battle.
> > > And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think
that
> > > Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is
> > fighting
> > > for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the left
> say
> > > that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve
any
> > > problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should
oppose
> > it.
> > > This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
> > >
> > > The European and Third World left have developed an ideology
that
> > > unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling and,
to
> a
> > > certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind this
> > > combination?
> > >
> > > "This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
> > > attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
> > > anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial
> capital
> > > and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea was
> > later
> > > adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
> > > identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does not
> > > criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the surface
> > > [aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly capitalists -
> is
> > > automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not
> > speaking
> > > about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization
> rhetoric
> > > is about.
> > >
> > > "These associations are so deeply written inside European and
> > > especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
> > > mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain
Leninist
> > > groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is
> more
> > or
> > > less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question of
> > > whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or
whether
> > the
> > > government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989,
> anti-Semitism
> > > and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space on
> the
> > > left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were hidden
in
> > the
> > > signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
> > > international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these ideas
> can
> > > be found in the mainstream.
> > >
> > > "So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the
> '20s:
> > > There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are fighting
> > > against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge American
> > > trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt a
> > > universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the
> > purveyors
> > > of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been
> > forgotten.
> > > These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in
the
> > > Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since
> > September
> > > 11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians
and
> > > Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and
> Britain
> > > on the other."
> > >
> > > Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a
Marxist,
> > see
> > > as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S. as
> the
> > > purveyor of global capitalism?
> > >
> > > "The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together
> Hamas,
> > > Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the
Balkans,
> > the
> > > Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very active
> in
> > > the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
> > > universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
> > > anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
> > > barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism or
> > > barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I
think
> > the
> > > fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to
be
> > its
> > > successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of the
> > > Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew
out
> > of
> > > the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They
didn't
> > fall
> > > from the moon.
> > >
> > > "But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which
> means
> > > in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its
own
> > > creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better
> world.
> > > The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very
> important -
> > > issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a very
> > small
> > > minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with the
> > > Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything.
> They
> > > are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of
> emancipation.
> > >
> > > "In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the
> '30s.
> > > On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews are
> > always
> > > in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting
for
> a
> > > capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National Socialist,
> > > self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In
1939,
> > the
> > > Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
> > > self-determination in the Third World. They had a very
anti-colonialist
> > > phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are
> being
> > > used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and
the
> > > Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
> > > position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
> > >
> > > "Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of the
> > U.S.,
> > > supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is signaling
> that
> > > it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in
the
> > > Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany
is
> > > being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So
people
> > > understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is quite
> > > interesting - and quite horrifying."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
On Thu, 10 Oct 2002, furtherfield wrote:
> Wally - er, are you an artist or an FBI fag, I cannot believe what you are
> saying. It's like the age of enlightenment never happened. Not in your neck
> of the woods, anyway…
But the age of Enlightenment is one of the major forces responsible
for the flattening out of humanity, luv. Even your anarchist heros
know it. If you read them through actually, instead of subscribing
to the fashionable uniform.
Man this makes me want to kick some butane.
Germans back in charge? That's psycho, they're all pricks.
>From: "Wally Keeler" <[email protected]>
>Reply-To: "Wally Keeler" <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>
>Subject: RHIZOME_RAW: PussyFoots of Peace
>Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 21:07:16 -0400
>
>For those peace activists who advocated Big Bush refrain from marching on
>to
>Baghdad as part of Desert Storm, bear responsibility for the miserable
>deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. For those peace activists who
>oppose regime change in Baghdad, please take responsibilty for the tens of
>thousands of deaths yet to come at the hands of the Saddam Baathist
>dictatorshit. More lives would be saved if the pressure was placed on the
>establishment of democracy in Iraq – established first by annihilating the
>Baathist regime. The pressure should be properly placed on the long-term
>aftermath of the destruction of the Baathists.
>
>
>========================================
>
>
>
> Thursday, October 10, 2002 Cheshvan 4, 5763 Israel Time: 01:32
>(GMT+3)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Interview / Vicious circles closing in
>
> By Micha Odenheimer
>
>
>
>
>
> Thomas von der Osten-Sacken: "The most regressive and dangerous
>elements in the Arab and Islamic world depend on Saddam Hussein."
>
> A journalist, human rights activist and intellectual, Thomas von der
>Osten-Sacken is considered one of Germany's leading authorities on human
>rights in Iraq. He began traveling to Iraq in 1991, when he spent eight
>months doing humanitarian work in the southern part of the country just
>after Saddam Hussein crushed the Shi'ite uprising there. In 1992, Von der
>Osten-Sacken co-founded an aid and advocacy organization called Wadi,
>operating in Iraqi Kurdistan - the semi-autonomous safe haven carved out
>for
>Kurdish refugees after the Gulf War - and on behalf of Iraqi refugees in
>Germany. He spends part of each year in Kurdistan where Wadi has founded
>the
>first shelter there for women in distress and is also involved in helping
>the local government reform the prison system that has been left over from
>Iraqi rule. In Germany, Wadi advises Iraqi opposition groups and works
>closely with the Coalition for a Democratic Iraq.
>
> Von der Osten-Sacken, 34, publishes articles in German magazines
>such
>as Jungle World and Konkret, and has co-edited a book on Iraq called
>"Saddam's Last Battle?", which is due to be published next month. He is one
>of the relatively few contemporary German writers and thinkers on the left
>who consider themselves pro-Israel and have developed a left-wing critique
>of the anti-globalization left in today's Europe. Along with his other
>activities, he is conducting research for his doctoral thesis on
>German-language Zionist newspapers in the 1930s for the German literature
>department at the University of Frankfurt.
>
> This interview was conducted with him earlier this week.
> ======================================================
>
> When did you first realize that the Iraqi regime was not just
>another
>Middle East dictatorship?
>
> Von der Osten-Sacken: "When I first came to Iraq, I very quickly
>realized that I could not compare the situation there to other Middle
>Eastern countries I had been in, like Syria, Jordan or Egypt. This country
>was hell. We were the only Europeans in a city called Amara in the Shi'ite
>area of southern Iraq near Basra, and we arrived just a few weeks after the
>uprising had been crushed. There was a belt of tanks around the city. The
>majority of buildings were burned out. There was no food in the market.
>There was also a terrible degree of malnourishment there.
>
> "People in Iraq won't talk freely, because they are terrified that
>their friends are working for one of Saddam's nine horrible security
>services. Because of this atmosphere, it took us three or four months to
>learn some details about the uprising. The Iraqis made people lie down in
>the streets and then buried them alive under asphalt. They killed everyone
>who looked a little religious, because this was a Shi'ite area. It was
>forbidden to take the corpses from the street. All in all, 60,000 or 70,000
>people were killed in this area in 1991.
>
> "The first thing that was done after the uprising was crushed was to
>repaint the pictures of Saddam Hussein. People had riddled them with
>bullets. Not one had been left. We were shocked at how neglected the south
>was, with open sewage systems, even though it is rich in oil. Saddam said
>before smashing the uprising that these Shi'ites were dirty people, not
>really Iraqis. We left there in October '91 when we felt we could not
>continue our work without unintentionally helping the government."
>
> What was the atmosphere like in Baghdad then?
>
> "Baghdad was 300 kilometers away, and we went quite often - for a
>good
>dinner, to have a meeting with another organization or even to make a phone
>call to Germany. The fear in Iraq, a BBC reporter said recently, is so
>palpable you can eat it. It's really indescribable. Syria is a
>dictatorship,
>but the fear and control in Iraq reaches into your living room. If there is
>no picture of Saddam Hussein in your living room, you might be arrested.
>There is no privacy. The Iraqi government considers everything political.
>In
>Syria, as long as you are not a member of the opposition, you can relax.
>You
>know you will not be harmed. But in Iraq, if you are in the wrong place at
>the wrong time, you may be arrested, tortured, killed."
>
> "When I was in southern Iraq in '91, we had a lot of conversations
>with a very nice, very sophisticated doctor. One day, he was watching
>television and the Iraqi army was being praised for having won the second
>part of the Gulf War [after the initial U.S. attack aimed at driving Iraq
>out of Kuwait]. The doctor just said, `Well, it is a strange victory if
>daily children are dying of hunger.' That was enough. Someone heard him. He
>was taken, tortured for three weeks and brought back a broken person.
>Letting one sentence slip is cause enough for a person to vanish into an
>Iraqi prison or even to be killed."
>
> You have said that estimates are that Saddam has killed
>approximately
>one million of his own citizens since 1979.
>
> "Yes, that would include Kurds, Shi'ites, Christians and Sunnis.
>There
>were two huge massacres. There was the so-called Anfal campaign against the
>Kurds at the end of the 1980s when 4,000 villages were destroyed, and about
>100,000 to 150,000 persons were killed, some with poison gas. Up to a
>million people were sent into internal exile. The other big massacre was in
>the south in the 1990s, where the regime has killed about 300,000 Shi'ites
>in the last 10 years. In addition, there have been enormous massacres
>against communists over the past two decades.
>
> "The estimate of one million killed only includes civilians. A
>million
>Iraqi soldiers were killed in the Iran-Iraq war. A half-million Iraqis died
>of hunger or disease because of sanctions on Iraq, and more were killed in
>the Gulf War. Some 1.5 to two million people have been internally
>displaced,
>and 4.5 million Iraqi refugees are scattered across the globe. Ten percent
>of the Iraqi population has been killed or deported during the rule of
>Saddam Hussein. That is the essence of his regime. It is not an accident.
>It
>is systematic."
>
> What is the ideology behind Saddam Hussein's regime?
>
> "The Ba'ath ideology mixes pan-Arabism with admiration of Mussolini
>and Hitler, some ideas of state socialism and the notion of an Arab
>supremacy which will be realized after the Arabs have liberated themselves
>from foreign - that means mainly Jewish - influence and British and
>American
>imperialism. Ba'athism is strongly anti-communist and anti-imperialist, and
>it is anti- Semitic from its beginning. Everything in Iraq is explained
>through this huge conspiracy theory against the Arabs, in general, and
>Iraq,
>in particular. Iraq is thought to be the greatest Arab nation and the
>natural leader of Arab unity."
>
> So Iraq sees itself as the center of the Arab world?
>
> "Yes, the leader of Arab unity. Saddam Hussein dreams of ruling a
>united Arab nation that would become a superpower confronting East and
>West.
>Iraqi children are taught in kindergarten that they have to be strong Arab
>fighters."
>
> Is Iraqi Ba'athism Islamist?
>
> "Pan-Arabism has always said that Mohammed is the forefather of
>pan-Arabism and that Islam was spoiled when it crossed the borders of the
>Arab world to Iran and Turkey. The task now is to `re-animate' the real
>Islam that was taught by Mohammed as an Arab ideology. Especially during
>the
>Iran-Iraq war, when Iraq had to face the Iranian revolution, they loaded
>their own ideology with Islamic content. The Iranians and the Zionists,
>they
>said, are part of a 2,000-year-old plot to smash Iraq and divide the Arabs.
>`We are fighting for the real Islam' the regime said, not the kind of
>spoiled Islam that Iran represents. I think it was a mistake for the
>Americans to believe, as they did, that Iraq was a stronghold against
>Islam."
>
> Is it conceivable that Al Qaeda and Iraq have cooperated?
>
> "Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden share the same enemies, the same
>conspiracy theories. They share the claim that they are fighting in the
>name
>of the Arab masses. Both these men grew up in the same poisoned climate of
>Arab dictatorships. Their ideologies are quite close, even if Saddam is not
>an Islamist. And since he has been supporting many terror organizations, I
>would not be surprised if there are close ties on the ground between Iraq
>and Al Qaeda.
>
> "I think that Osama bin Laden is trying to walk in the footsteps of
>Saddam Hussein. At the same time, Saddam Hussein in the 1990s was trying to
>strengthen the ties between Iraq and the Islamic movements. He put `Allah
>Akhbar' [`God is great'] into the flag of Iraq and also financed different
>Islamic groups in Palestine and other places in the Arab world. There is a
>terrorist education center in Baghdad called Salmanpak and according to the
>Iraqi opposition, in the mid-'90s, terrorists from other countries were
>being trained there in such skills as how to hijack planes and use chemical
>weapons. They may be cooperating and even if they are not, these are two
>trees growing in the same soil."
>
> So you would not agree with the idea that the war on Iraq is a
>distraction from the war against terror that President George Bush has
>proclaimed.
>
> "American policy in Iraq is a series of huge mistakes. Firstly, it
>was
>a mistake to support that horrible regime in the 1980s knowing, for
>example,
>about the massacres against the Kurds. Secondly, it was a huge mistake not
>to let the Iraqi people topple Saddam in '91. The Americans feared
>democracy
>in the Middle East, they feared the breakup of Iraq because it would
>strengthen Iran, so they allowed Saddam to crush the uprising.
>
> "With regimes like the Iraqi one, there will be no peace in the
>Middle
>East. You cannot contain a regime like Saddam Hussein's. That was a mistake
>of the West. So the question is: Is America ready to face up to the
>mistakes
>it made in '91 and in the '80s? Are the Americans ready to support
>democracy? Because people like Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out
>of the Middle East. They are not products of Afghanistan."
>
> What kind of influence does Saddam have in the Arab street, and what
>kind of affect could it have to topple him?
>
> "The most regressive and dangerous elements in the Arab and Islamic
>world depend on Saddam Hussein. Really toppling Saddam Hussein means
>uprooting the Ba'ath regime, with the help of the Iraqi people. This would
>give the final blow to pan-Arabism in the Middle East. Syria and a lot of
>very radical factions in Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt and the Gulf states
>would
>be affected. These factions look up to Saddam Hussein as a pan-Arabist,
>anti-imperialist hero - although he is anti-imperialist in the tradition of
>the Nazis, not the left. Also, Saddam is financing organizations like the
>Arab Liberation Front in Palestine, which is a Ba'ath organization. He is
>paying the families of suicide attackers. He is directly and indirectly
>responsible for a lot of terrorism in the Middle East."
>
> What is his relationship with Yasser Arafat and the PLO?
>
> "Part of the Palestinian establishment has very close ties to Iraq
>since 1991 when the Palestinians decided to support Saddam, which was a
>huge
>mistake. This includes some quite influential figures within the security
>apparatus of Yasser Arafat and the PLO. There is a struggle within the
>Palestinian establishment right now over whether these elements should be
>isolated. I think that certain people like Abu Mazen and some of the
>security forces who were trained by the CIA are struggling against others
>who have very close ties to Baghdad, and who still want to join Iraq in the
>next battle with terrorist attacks, or worse - with chemical or biological
>attacks on Israel or somewhere else in the world. That, I think, would be
>another terrible mistake for the Palestinians to make."
>
> What will have to be done, the day after Saddam is gone, to make the
>distinction between merely switching Iraqi regimes and starting something
>completely new and democratic?
>
> "In 1991, the Americans feared the results of a public uprising.
>They
>hoped to find someone within the military who could topple Saddam Hussein
>and rule Iraq with some cosmetic changes, but with the same security
>apparatus. This hope proved a failure because for 25 years, Saddam has been
>trying to get rid of anyone that might pose a threat to him. Every
>influential general has been killed. Yearly cleansing campaigns are carried
>out against high-ranking members of the Ba'ath Party so that no one can
>threaten the position of his family, which is more or less ruling Iraq. The
>hawks in the U.S., people like Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney or Richard
>Perle, analyzed the situation and realized that they cannot just change
>someone at the top. It is not like a South American dictatorship. If they
>really want change, they have to create a new Iraq.
>
> "Iraq is so ruthless and cruel against any opposition that people
>cannot rise up without an outside trigger. But the moment a possibility is
>created, the vast majority of the Iraqi people will rise up. They will
>uproot the Ba'ath Party and even take personal revenge on the ruling
>regime;
>you won't have any Ba'ath Party anymore. So you really have to think about
>what to do afterward. The only alternative is creating a democracy, which
>is
>a real experiment because nothing like this exists in the region. Iraq
>considers itself an Arab country, but actually contains nearly all the
>different minority and ethnic groups of the Middle East.
>
> "So, if it is really done with heart, it is the first step to
>creating
>a new Middle East. A democracy in the region will very much affect other
>countries. It is a huge challenge and experiment. The question is: Do the
>Americans know what they are going to do there? Because Turkey, Iran and
>Europe will all try to impose their own policy. Iraq is an oil-rich country
>and you don't know if this great game will not lead to catastrophe."
>
> Does Iraq have a national identity that could come together as a
>democracy? Or are these fears that the Shi'ites and Kurds will split off
>legitimate?
>
> "Iraq is very unique in the Arab world. First of all, you already
>have
>a very long tradition of opposition to the central regime. And you have a
>tradition of a national identity. Even the Kurds in Iraq never wanted to
>split off, unlike their brethren in Turkey. They want a federal Iraq with
>strong Kurdish autonomy. I don't think the Shi'ites want to split off.
>Usually the minority is the one that wants to split off. The Shi'ite are
>the
>majority in Iraq. What they want is more influence in Baghdad. From my
>experience from living there, I don't think the Shi'ites are attracted by
>the mullah regime of Iran. You also have a strong leftist tradition, mainly
>in places like Basra and Amara, and Iraq has one of the oldest and
>strongest
>communist parties in the Middle East. This tradition has been strongly
>repressed by the Ba'ath Party, but it still exists.
>
> "I think the Kurdish autonomy is a positive example for Iraq.
>Kurdistan has horrible conditions. It's not recognized internationally. It
>is more or less under double embargo: the international sanctions against
>Iraq and some internal sanctions from the central government. Turkey, Iran
>and Syria are all trying to destabilize the Kurds. But even under these
>dire
>circumstances, the Kurds have been able to build up what is not really a
>democracy, but a place which is, except for Israel, the most liberal and
>free in the Middle East. There are a lot of newspapers, freedom of speech,
>up to a limit - you are not allowed to insult the Kurdish political
>leaders - but in comparison with central Iraq, you can really call it
>paradise. And there is to a certain extent democracy. If the Kurds are able
>to do it, why shouldn't the Iraqis, with assistance from abroad?"
>
> Are you in favor of waging war against Iraq?
>
> "Let me say first that I am not in favor of war, especially until we
>know how the Americans want to conduct the war. But one also has to
>consider
>that what the Lebanese intellectual Fouad Ajami has said: that for 30
>years,
>Iraq has been conducting a war against its own society. Saddam Hussein is
>conducting a war against his own people and it must be stopped. It is hard
>to think of another people who have suffered in the last 20 years like the
>Iraqi people have suffered at the hands of Saddam Hussein and because of
>international policy aimed at containing him. If Americans are really ready
>to topple him, it might be very good for the Iraqi people and very good for
>the region. If the Americans start just another stupid war like the one in
>1991, then I am against it, too.
>
> "At this very moment there is a huge Arabization campaign against
>Kurds living in Karkuk. People are systematically deported because the
>regime wants to change a Kurdish city into an Arab one. Just now there are
>tremendous prison cleansing campaigns. Every Wednesday, the security forces
>come into the largest prison in Baghdad and say: You, you, you and you.
>Five
>hundred people are taken out to be killed just because the prisons are
>overcrowded. The Iraqi National Congress says that there are 600,000 to
>700,000 political prisoners in Iraqi detention camps at present.
>
> "So the question is: Are they really ready to support democracy in
>the
>Middle East? In that case, I think the war is necessary and good. Or do
>they
>just want to put some horrible general in instead of Saddam? Then I oppose
>this war very much."
>
> During the Gulf War in 1991, Israel refrained from retaliating after
>the Scud missile attacks. How should Israel respond if it is attacked this
>time?
>
> "Seventy percent of the Iraqi people are allies of the Americans. If
>the war is waged correctly, it will focus on the regime, on the leaders, on
>the security apparatus and on this horrible Ba'ath Party, but not on the
>Iraqi people. So if Israel is attacked, it should consider this point: This
>is a war against the regime, and the Iraqi people are allies in fighting
>Saddam Hussein. So it is very important to refrain from attacking
>civilians.
>There has been a debate about Israel nuking Iraq if attacked with weapons
>of
>mass destruction. That would be a disaster - the end of the democratization
>of the Middle East. Everyone would be against the Iraqi opposition and
>against Israel. If there is a need for Israel to strike back, it should
>only
>be against military targets. Israel should openly declare that it is not
>conducting a war against the Iraqi people, and that it is ready to support
>a
>multi-ethnic democracy in Iraq, friendly to the Iraqi people and only
>hostile to this government."
>
> What is the attitude toward Israel and the United States in
>liberated
>Kurdistan?
>
> "The United States created the safe haven in 1991 not for the Kurds,
>but to protect Iran and Turkey from the influx of refugees. Still, people
>know that they are protected by the U.S. and they have a positive attitude
>toward it. I spent September 11, 2001 in Kurdistan in front of the
>television and the next day, I crossed through Syria to Jordan. In Syria,
>people told me that it was a conspiracy against the Arabs, but in
>Kurdistan,
>people were deeply shocked and sorry for the victims of the World Trade
>Center attack.
>
> "In regard to Israel, it's astonishing: The Kurds were all taught in
>Iraqi schools that the Jews and Israel are the main enemy, blood-suckers,
>part of a huge conspiracy, but I did not find any real anti-Israel
>sentiments. Critics of the occupation, of the settlements, yes, there are
>some, and I think that is legitimate, but no anti-Semitic conspiracy
>theory.
>In fact, people in Kurdistan are now starting to reflect on the mass
>immigration of Kurdish Jews in the 1950s when 99 percent of the Jewish
>community left mostly to Israel. Many times, I heard Kurds saying that it
>was sad that this living together with Jews had stopped, and that the
>Jewish
>heritage of Kurdistan should be kept alive.
>
> "Also, you have to understand the dynamic. Nearly every week, Saddam
>Hussein or a leading Ba'ath member declares that Iraqi Kurdistan is the
>Israel of Iraq, or accuses the Kurds of being Zionists agents. The same
>thing is said about every opposition party - be they Islamists,
>nationalists, communists or Christians. People who are anti-Zionist
>themselves, such as Iraqi communists, are put into prison, tortured and
>killed as Zionist spies. That forces people to have a different attitude
>toward the whole Middle East conspiracy theory. I think this is why
>intellectual Iraqis abroad are much less likely to be anti-Israel than
>other
>Arab intellectuals. Iraqis oppose pan-Arabism and Ba'athism much more than
>they oppose Israel. So, it may be more possible to find a way to work with
>a
>future Iraqi government than with any other government in the region. If
>the
>Kurds are strong in Baghdad, the Jews will not face this irrational
>anti-Jewish sentiment."
>
> What do you think drives German policy against U.S. intervention in
>Iraq?
>
> "Germany gains very good material benefit from Iraq. One should not
>forget that German technology enabled Iraq to enlarge the range of the Scud
>missiles so that they could reach Israel, that without German assistance,
>Iraq would not have been able to gas Iranian soldiers or its own people in
>Kurdistan or to threaten Israel. So there are deep relations. Iran, Libya
>and Syria, but especially Iraq, have this relationship with Germany. German
>policy has always put its eggs in Saddam's basket and gained from trade
>with
>Iraq, especially after '91 when America and England were out of Iraq.
>
> "Also, ideology is important, especially at such times as during the
>last election campaign when the Social Democrats start to play on the
>anti-American piano. There are very close ties between a certain German
>ideology dating back to the 19th century, running through World War I and
>escalating in World War II with the Nazis and continuing afterward, which
>has close ties to pan-Arabism. One that shares the same enemies: America,
>the Jews, Israel. Anti-American and anti-Israel resentments are very strong
>in Germany and they have become stronger since 1989.
>
> "Saddam Hussein is not usually seen in Germany as a horrible
>dictator
>murdering his own people. People blame the sanctions and not him, and
>people
>blame the Israeli occupation for the whole situation in the Middle East,
>not
>Palestinian terrorists or Saddam for continually destabilizing the region.
>Also, since 1945, many Germans have very strong anti-war feelings,
>especially if these wars are conducted by the United States. The majority
>of
>people opposed the second part of the Gulf War; there were tremendous
>demonstrations against it. Now this opposition is stronger, because Germany
>is stronger.
>
> "Germany is now conducting its own independent foreign policy, which
>in the last two to four years, has become simply to contrast itself to the
>U.S. If the U.S. is supporting a government, we should support the
>opposition to this government. In the Middle East, there is an attempt to
>tighten relations with Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinians and Iraq. Also, the
>Germans are quite afraid of the archives in Baghdad and what they tell
>about
>the poison gas and other weapons deals that were made between Iraq and a
>lot
>of German enterprises."
>
> So both the left and the right in Germany have strong anti-American
>feeling?
>
> "Anti-American and anti-Israeli-anti-Semitic. At the moment, you can
>hardly distinguish between the very far right wing and the very far left
>wing. The far right openly supports Saddam Hussein, saying that he is
>fighting the Jews and the Americans and thus supporting the German battle.
>And certain left-wingers from an orthodox left-wing tradition think that
>Saddam Hussein is anti-imperialist, anti-globalization, that he is fighting
>for the rights of the Arabs to self-determination. Others on the left say
>that Saddam may be horrible, but another American war will not solve any
>problems. The war will just help Israel's interest, so we should oppose it.
>This is also the governmental policy at the moment."
>
> The European and Third World left have developed an ideology that
>unites anti-globalization, anti-Americanism, anti-Israel feeling and, to a
>certain extent, anti-Semitism. What is the internal logic behind this
>combination?
>
> "This is not a very new phenomenon. In the German left, these
>attitudes existed during the 1920s with the idea of `a shortened
>anti-capitalism' that distinguished very sharply between financial capital
>and productive capital, and demonized financial capital. This idea was
>later
>adapted by the Nazis, and is in itself anti-Semitic because Jews are
>identified with the circulation sphere - with banks. Whoever does not
>criticize capitalism in a Marxist way, but criticizes only the surface
>[aspects] of capitalism - the huge banks or the monopoly capitalists - is
>automatically using an anti-Semitic phraseology, even if he is not speaking
>about Jews or Israel. This is what some of the anti-globalization rhetoric
>is about.
>
> "These associations are so deeply written inside European and
>especially German history, that you can be anti-Semitic without even
>mentioning Jews. This way of thinking was kept alive in certain Leninist
>groups and in the far right wing in the '60s and '70s, and now it is more
>or
>less unfolding in the mainstream movements. It is always a question of
>whether these resentments, which are quite common, are taboo or whether the
>government is signaling that they can be voiced. Until 1989, anti-Semitism
>and anti-Americanism were taboo in Germany. These views found space on the
>left and on the far right. In the middle of society, they were hidden in
>the
>signals and phrases communicated in the subtext. Now, due to the new
>international constellation, the taboo has broken down and these ideas can
>be found in the mainstream.
>
> "So you have more or less the same idea that you had since the '20s:
>There is a global struggle pitting the `good' people who are fighting
>against colonialization against a conspiracy between the huge American
>trusts, banks and the Jews, which wants to force the world to adapt a
>universal capitalism. The Jews were also accused then of being the
>purveyors
>of the global communist principle, but since 1989, that has been forgotten.
>These old ideas were re-animated now due to the ethnic conflicts in the
>Balkans and the conflict in the Middle East, and especially since September
>11, when the focus has been on the conflict between the Palestinians and
>Israel, and the conflict between Iraq on one side and the U.S. and Britain
>on the other."
>
> Leaving aside the overt anti-Semitism, what do you, as a Marxist,
>see
>as the primary mistake of this ideology that is attacking the U.S. as the
>purveyor of global capitalism?
>
> "The moment this anti-globalization ideology brings together Hamas,
>Saddam Hussein, Osama bin Laden, nationalistic movements in the Balkans,
>the
>Zapatists in Mexico, and the neo-Nazi right wing, which is very active in
>the anti-globalization movement, it means they are not fighting for
>universal freedom, liberation and emancipation, but are reproducing
>anti-universalist, anti-Semitic stereotypes that are only leading to
>barbarism. Rosa Luxemburg once said that the question is socialism or
>barbarism, and that question is still valid. But at the moment, I think the
>fight is to defend the Western world against those who would like to be its
>successors. These people are also, dialectically, the products of the
>Western, capitalistic world. Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden grew out of
>the bad politics of the U.S. and Europe in the Middle East. They didn't
>fall
>from the moon.
>
> "But at the moment, I think one has to support the West, which means
>in this case America, Britain and Israel, in its battle against its own
>creations. Then you can think again of how to create a much better world.
>The questions the anti-globalization movement raises are very important -
>issues like the environment, world hunger and the enrichment of a very
>small
>minority of people while the vast majority become poorer. But with the
>Ba'ath Party and Hamas as your actors, you will not change anything. They
>are not the historical subjects who are carrying the idea of emancipation.
>
> "In extremis, you have a constellation that reminds one of the '30s.
>On the one hand, you have Britain, the U.S. and Israel - the Jews are
>always
>in the metaphysical center of these conflicts. This side is fighting for a
>capitalistic Western ideology. Then you have these National Socialist,
>self-determination ideas, which are always led by the Germans. In 1939, the
>Germans said that they were fighting universal capitalism and for
>self-determination in the Third World. They had a very anti-colonialist
>phraseology. You can find the same words and the same phrases as are being
>used today in the '40s when the Germans were supporting India's and the
>Arabs' revolt against the British. Even France is again in the same
>position - supporting Britain and the U.S. half-heartedly.
>
> "Ten years ago, everyone thought Germany was a close ally of the
>U.S.,
>supporting its policy. But no. In this conflict, Germany is signaling that
>it is standing on the other side. Everywhere in the Middle East, in the
>Syrian press, in the Hezbollah press, in the Baghdadi press, Germany is
>being praised for taking the same side they did 50 years ago. So people
>understand what the Germans are doing. And I think that that is quite
>interesting - and quite horrifying."
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com