In 1917, Lieutenant General Stanley Maude marched with the British army into Baghdad — then part of the Ottoman Empire — with a proclamation. “Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors or enemies, but as liberators,” he said.
No one within earshot believed him.
The Iraqis all knew the British came as colonizers, and the iron fist of British domination proved them right. By 1920, British rule was so despised in Iraq that a popular rebellion uniting the country’s many divisions of sect (Sunnis and Shiite), class (merchant and laborer) and geography (urban and rural) broke out. To quell the uprising, the British resorted to a massive aerial bombing campaign, killing thousands of Iraqis.
In January 1991, then-US president George H.W. Bush held a televised announcement of his invasion of Iraq. He told the world that Americans “have no argument with the people of Iraq.”
“Indeed, for the innocents caught in this conflict, I pray for their safety. Our goal is not the conquest of Iraq,” he added.
Yet, for more than a decade after, US-sponsored sanctions brutalized Iraqi infrastructure. In 1996, then-US ambassador to the UN Madeleine Albright was asked on the TV show 60 Minutes if she believed the UN-reported deaths of possibly more than 500,000 Iraqi children due to the sanctions was “worth it” (as leverage over then-Iraqi president Saddam Hussein). Albright immediately responded.
“We believe the price is worth it,” she said.
In 2003, then-US president George W Bush launched his invasion of Iraq with his own televised speech.
“If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you... We will help you to build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free,” he said.
A 2013 study estimated that in Iraq between 2003 and 2011, “close to half a million excess deaths are attributable to the recent Iraq war and occupation.”
After more than a century of such speeches, Arabs have become accustomed to such talk. It is the language of colonialism. The words might suggest high-minded notions of performative concern, but the reality is entirely the opposite: pure dominance delivered with bullets and bombs from the land, the sea and the sky.
On Tuesday last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tried to give his version of Maude’s speech to Lebanon, but with a malevolent twist. Maude had told his Iraqi audience that “your lands have been subject to the tyranny of strangers, your palaces have fallen into ruins, your gardens have sunk in desolation, and your forefathers and yourselves have groaned in bondage.”
Like Maude, Netanyahu sought to paint a sovereign people lost to the existence of a foreign power.
“Do you remember when your country was called ‘the pearl of the Middle East’? I do. So what happened to Lebanon?” he said.
His answer was hardly convincing.
“The country that actually conquered Lebanon is not Israel,” he said. “It’s Iran.”
I have spent a considerable amount of time in Lebanon, a gorgeous country full of multilayered histories and a dynamism that is as unique as it is vibrant. While it is true that Iran has influence among some sectors in Lebanon, it is equally true that the US has even greater influence in even more sectors in Israel. Whether you like it or not, Hezbollah is an indigenous and multifaceted Lebanese political party and social movement.
Netanyahu’s allegation that Hezbollah is merely an Iranian proxy that has taken over Lebanon should be seen for what it is: a ploy to stoke as much sectarian division in Lebanon as possible, and a brazen attempt to lead the country into yet another disastrous civil war, all for Israel’s benefit.
More frighteningly still is Netanyahu’s statement to Lebanese.
“You have an opportunity to save Lebanon before it falls into the abyss of the long war that will lead to destruction and suffering like we see in Gaza,” he said.
Not that it was worth anything, but in the past, the colonial script focused on the (usually false) promises of a better future. Netanyahu, on the other hand, heads right to the threat, saying that Israel would turn Lebanon into Gaza. Worse yet, his threat utilizes his own ongoing campaign of unspeakable carnage in Gaza, an offensive labeled as plausibly a genocide by the International Court of Justice.
As Netanyahu posted his “message” to Lebanon, Israeli forces were once again besieging the northern Gaza Strip, bombing schools turned into shelters, encircling the Jabaliya refugee camp, killing more journalists.
How is Netanyahu’s speech to the people of Lebanon not an example of terrorism? He is clearly menacing civilians with death from the skies (Israel is already responsible for more than 2,000 deaths in Lebanon), certainly thus terrorizing them, all to generate a political change favorable to him in Lebanon — or is the charge of terrorism reserved only for Arabs and Iranians?
Israel is telling the Lebanese people that it will destroy Lebanon unless the Lebanese kill their own neighbors. This is cruel and amoral. Who is going to stop Netanyahu and his monstrous policy? Certainly not the US, which feigns concerns for civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon, while arming Israel to the teeth.
In the readout of the latest call between US President Joe Biden and Netanyahu on Wednesday last week, the word “ceasefire” did not even appear. After a year of Biden arming Israel’s assaults on the region, we can only conclude that this massive destruction is US policy, all those curated reports of Biden’s pained concerns and complaints against Netanyahu notwithstanding.
There is a long history of outsiders raining death on Arabs. Have the West become so accustomed to it that it seems almost natural, so inured to it that yet another massacre passes them by with barely a notice? If so, what does that say about the West? And who will stop this madness?
Moustafa Bayoumi is a Guardian US columnist.
Many foreigners, particularly Germans, are struck by the efficiency of Taiwan’s administration in routine matters. Driver’s licenses, household registrations and similar procedures are handled swiftly, often decided on the spot, and occasionally even accompanied by preferential treatment. However, this efficiency does not extend to all areas of government. Any foreigner with long-term residency in Taiwan — just like any Taiwanese — would have encountered the opposite: agencies, most notably the police, refusing to accept complaints and sending applicants away at the counter without consideration. This kind of behavior, although less common in other agencies, still occurs far too often. Two cases
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
RSS