Friday, March 7. 2008
Samantha Power: Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira de Mello
and the Fight to Save the World (2008, Penguin Press)
The Jan. 7, 2008 issue of The New Yorker has a piece
by Samantha Power called "The Envoy: The United Nations' doomed
mission to Iraq." The article is presumably excerpted from Power's
forthcoming book, Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira de Mello
and the Fight to Save the World. The following quotes are
from the magazine article:
The introduction talks about how UN officials feared US success
in the 2003 invasion of Iraq (p. 43):
On April 9, 2003, when a U.S. Marine tank helped topple the
towering statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad's Firdos Square, many
officials at the headquarters of the United Nations, in New York,
averted their eyes from the celebratory images unfolding on CNN. A few
days later, when a wide-shot photograph revealed that relatively few
Iraqis had participated in the statue demolition, U.N. employees
rapidly disseminated the image through e-mail. "We didn't wish bad
things for the Iraqis," a U.N. official recalls. "But we were
terrified that if the Bush Administration got away with talking all
over international law it would jeopardize everything we stood
for."
The Security Council had withheld support for the invasion, and
Secretary-General Kofi Annan and U.N. diplomats had warned of the
human suffering that it would cause; they were chastened by the ease
with which the American-led Coalition had reached Baghdad, and by the
relative bloodlessness of the battle. A swift victory, U.N. officials
worried, would establish a dangerous precedent, emboldening member
states to go to war even in the face of firm international
opposition. Annan, speaking with colleagues, lamented the possibly
irreparable loss of U.N. relevance.
Of course, that's what Bush's neocons were aiming for. But the
UN had already sacrificed its relevance, starting in 1948 when it
and the world powers who had launched it failed to their first major
problem: Palestine. That continuing failure has reminded the world
of their irrelevance ever since. Over the years the US has paid
less and less lip service to the UN, under Bush only going to the
UN for the most cynical political cover: e.g., 1483 (p.43):
Whatever the Europeans' aims, U.S. diplomats, who were still
basking in their apparent victory, largely dictated the terms of
Security Council Resolution 1483, offering other countries no say in
how Iraq was governed, providing no timetable for departure, and
handing the U.N. an ill-defined, subservient role. Although the
U.N. resolution technically obliged the occupiers to abide by the
Geneva Conventions -- which prohibit occupying authorities from
exploiting a country's resources or making fundamental changes to its
government -- the international norms of occupation were
superseded. Resolution 1483 effectively granted the Americans and the
British the legal authority to choose Iraq's political leaders, to
spend its oil revenue, and to transform its legal, political, and
economic structures. It also called on other U.N. member states to
contribute personnel, equipment, and other resources to the
Coalition's effort. For the first time in history, the Security
Council was upholding the occupation of one U.N. member state by
another. Mona Khalil, a lawyer at headquarters, set up a screen saver
on her computer that read "The U.N. Charter has left the
building."
Despite reservations, the UN took the crumbs given it, and sent
veteran diplomat Sergio Vieira de Mello, against his better judgment,
to Baghdad (p. 46):
When Vieira de Mello first arrived in East Timor, in 1999, the
Timorese had been deeply grateful to the U.N. for having staged a
referendum that had led to its independence from Indonesia. But in
Iraq U.N. civil servants like Vieira de Mello were tarred by their
association with the weapons inspectors whom the U.N. had sent into
the country during Saddam's regime; they were equally resented for the
sanctions that the U.N. member states had imposed on Saddam's regime,
crippling the economy. Some Iraqis even saw officials working for the
humanitarian Oil-for-Food program as agents of punishment. There were
advantages, however, to having a history in Iraq. Whereas the
Coalition relied disproportionately on Iraqi exiles for intelligence,
the U.N. had three thousand Iraqi staff members who had remained in
the country, even during the invasion. Vieira de Mello thought that it
would be easier for him to get a read on the Iraqi street than it was
for Bremer.
(pp. 46-47):
When Vieira de Mello and his U.N. team entered the former palace
where Bremer had chosen to work, they saw Americans emerging from
offices identified as various Iraqi ministries. Resolution 1483 had
envisaged the Coalition as a temporary authority in Iraq; Vieira de
Mello now realized that the Coalition considered itself an actual
government. At the meeting, Bremer explained that he saw Phase One of
the transition as the uprooting of the Baathist regime and the
establishment of law, order, and basic services. Vieira de Mello
worried that these goals were at cross-purposes: uprooting the old
regime would undermine the state's power to provide the services and
stability that Bremer recognized were essential. Yet Bremer seemed
unconcerned. "We expect to turn the corner in the next month or so,"
he said. Phase Two, Bremer went on, included economic reconstruction,
job creation, and the formation of democratic bodies. He intended to
appoint a group of Iraqis that would select the drafters of a new
constitution. Vieira de Mello winced at the idea that a constitution
would be drafted before general elections were held, and it would seem
like an illegitimate American charter. But he held back his views,
characteristically reluctant to alienate somebody before he had first
had the chance to win him over. (Douglas Stafford, the former Deputy
U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, once described Vieira de Mello as
"a man who doesn't know how to make an enemy.")
Vieira de Mello returned to the Canal Hotel, where he had a heated
discussion with his top staff. Jamal Benomar, one of his Arab-speaking
advisers, insisted that the U.S., by taking over the governing
functions of Iraq, and acting as a full sovereign, had already
violated Resolution 1483. He urged Vieira de Mello to press for the
immediate creation of an Iraqi government. Otherwise, the U.N. would
appear complicit in an occupation despised by Iraqis. Vieira de Mello
countered that Bremer would respond badly to criticism. He believed
that the U.N. had to work with the Americans in order to change their
approach. "We can't just sit at the Canal Hotel and do nothing," he
told his team. "You can't help people from a distance."
(p. 51):
Vieira de Mello liked to repeat what he had learned after years of
frustration: "Soldiers make bad policemen." After the looting and
chaos that followed the fall of Saddam's regime, the Justice
Department had drawn up plans to deploy to Iraq more than six thousand
police trainers. But only fifty trainers had arrived so
far. Electricity, water, and other utilities operated intermittently
at best. Vieira de Mello reminded Bremer that much of Kosovo and all
of East Timor had been burned to the ground when the U.N. arrived but
that the U.N. administrators had managed to mobilize international
resources for recovery. Yet Bremer seemed unwilling to give the U.N. a
substantive role; around this time, Vieira de Mello told George
Packer, a reporter for this magazine, that the "neocon side of
Bremer's personality" was emerging.
In meetings with Bremer and General Sanchez, Vieira de Mello asked
about the thousands of prisoners being held at a U.S. base near the
Baghdad airport who had been crammed into facilities without
air-conditioning or sufficient oversight of guards. He argued that
human rights were the cornerstone of all that had been wrong with
Saddam's reign. He stressed the importance of creating a database for
Iraqis in detention, and he asked that family members and lawyers be
granted access to the detainees. He urged that the
preventive-detention period be reduced from twenty-one days to
seventy-two hours, that status review be instituted, and that
something like a public-defender system be created. "I'm not accusing
your soldiers of abuse," he told Sanchez. "I'm saying, 'You don't have
the checks and balances in place to guard against abuse.'"
Vieira de Mello was careful to convey these complaints in private
and without shrillness.
The latter is the critical point. By not criticizing the US
occupation in public the UN failed to leverage its reputation
either to change US policy or to gain good will from Iraqis;
as such, the UN blended into the US occupation. The US could
use the UN presence to enhance its legitimacy in the west,
while the UN became just another occupation target in Iraq.
A little hubris here, but the general point is likely true
(p. 52):
Vieira de Mello's dealings with U.N. headquarters were making him
especially tense. He had always been exasperated by the organization's
delayed responses, the administrative hassles, the obliviousness to a
field staff's daily trials. But in Iraq these problems were
magnified. As devoted as he was to the U.N., he exploded in
frustration. "The U.N. is unable to attract the best," Vieira de Mello
complained to Salamé. "And on the rare occasion that the U.N. happens
to find the best it doesn't have the slightest idea how to keep
them. If the U.N. ever succeeds, it is by accident."
(p. 54):
Vieira de Mello began to see the growing insurgency as the
consequence of an increasingly malignant occupation. Hemmed in by
Resolution 1483, however, he concluded that the only way to improve
security in Baghdad was to work even harder to get the Coalition to
give up power. Coalition troops, he told a Brazilian journalist, had
to "have greater sensitivity and respect for the customs of the
people." They had to focus on the dignity of Iraqis, which was being
trampled daily: Iraqis had lived under a barbarous regime; the war
with Iran had killed hundreds of thousands; they had suffered years of
devastating sanctions; their government had been overthrown by
outsiders; and now, in "one of the most humiliating periods in the
history of this people," they had almost no say on how they were being
ruled.
Vieira de Mello began drafting an op-ed article. An occupation, he
wrote, can be "grounded in nothing but good intentions. But morally,
and practically, I doubt it can ever legitimate: its time, if it ever
had one, has passed." He urged the Americans and the British to "aim
openly and effectively at their own disappearance."
Article ends with Vieira de Mello dying, trapped for hours under
rubble when the UN building in Baghdad was bombed. A second bombing
finally drove the UN out of Iraq, leaving Bremer and the Americans
to enjoy their tainted sovereignty.
Just as I was getting ready to post this, I noticed that Power
was forced to resign from her perch advising the Obama campaign.
Greg Mitchell reports:
Latest firestorm in campaign: Harvard prof and star author Samantha
Power calls Hillary a "monster" . . . a little too late says that's
off-the-record, gets in the paper. Problem: She is a top Obama foreign
policy adviser, his "Condi," as some have said. She quickly
apologizes, but today the Clinton team calls for her ouster. Andrew
Sullivan, a big Obama backer, weighs in: "The good professor blurts
out the truth. There is something monstrous about a couple so
intoxicated with money, power and secrecy and so unencumbered by any
ethical constraints that they will do anything, say anything, be
anything in order to stay ahead." This comes the day after the Clinton
team likened Obama to Ken Starr.
I'm not sure which of many angles to this semi-story is the most
sordid. I wouldn't call Clinton a monster, but can't guarantee I'd
be able to suppress a chuckle if someone else did. I don't exactly
agree with what Sullivan said, but there's some truth to it. I'm
not a fan of Power -- she strikes me as one of those "dangerous
do-gooders" the Marine in Generation Kill refers to -- but
she certainly knows more about the UN and how to work with it than
9 out of 10 foreign policy wonks in America these days, and I can
see that as a useful resource (although hardly critical at this
stage in the campaign). Most of all, I don't like the current vogue
of summary execution for misspeaking, but Clinton's had to sack
people in her organization for comparable gaffes. On the other
hand, the media and much of the electorate seem to be so shallow
at this point that elections can turn on this nonsense.
Rajiv Chandrasekaran: Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside
Iraq's Green Zone (2006; paperback, 2007, Vintage Books)
I came late to this book, largely because I was peeved by how
readily Chandrasekaran would parrot any US propaganda line when he
frequently appeared in PBS news reports from Baghdad. I suppose his
payback was access to the inner workings of the CPA, and he payed
them back impressively in his perfectly titled book. It focuses on
what for most reporters should have been the easy part, covering
Paul Bremer's CPA in Baghdad's safe, secluded Green Zone, showing
what should have been obvious from the start: that the party hacks
the Bush administration sent to Baghdad were the wrong people at
the wrong time in the wrong place with the wrong ideas and skill
sets.
Still, the biggest problem is that this ends when Bremer leaves.
The CPA/Bremer period is by pretty well documented by now, at least
compared to the much more secretive occupation command that followed,
first under John Negroponte then under Zalmay Khalilzad. This was
the period when it became unsafe for reporters to leave the Green
Zone, so it's all the more disappointing that so few bothered to
do some actual reporting on what was actually happening inside the
palace.
Welcome to the Green Zone (p. 15):
It was Saddam who first decided to turn Baghdad's prime riverfront
real estate into a gated city within a city, with posh villas,
bungalows, government buildings, shops, and even a hospital. He didn't
want his aides and bodyguards, who were given homes near his palace,
to mingle with the masses. And he didn't want outsiders peering
in. The homes were bigger, the trees greener, the streets wider than
in the rest of Baghdad. There were more palms and fewer people. There
were no street vendors and no beggars. No one other than members of
Saddam's inner circle or his trusted cadre of guards and housekeepers
had any idea what was inside. Those who loitered near the entrances
sometimes landed in jail. Iraqis drove as fast as they could on roads
near the compound lest they be accused of gawking.
It was the ideal place for the Americans to pitch their
tents. Saddam had surrounded the area with a tall brick wall. There
were only three points of entry. All the military had to do was park
tanks at the gates.
The Americans expanded Saddam's neighborhood by a few blocks to
encompass the gargantuam Convention Center and the al-Rasheed [hotel],
a once-luxurious establishment made famous by CNN's live broadcasts
during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. They fortified the perimeter with
seventeen-foot-high blast barriers made of foot-thick concrete topped
with coils of razor wire.
Interviewing Iraq's proconsul, Paul Bremer shortly after arriving,
Chandrasekaran asks what is his top priority? (p. 70):
Economic reform, he said. He had a three-step plan. The first was
to restore electricity, water, and other basic services. The second
was to put "liquidity in the hands of the people" -- reopening banks,
offering loans, paying salaries. The third was to "corporatize and
privatize state-owned enterprises," and to "wean people from the idea
the state supports everything." Saddam's government owned hundreds of
factories. It subsidized the cost of gasoline, electricity, and
fertilizer. Every family received monthly food rations. Bremer
regarded all of that as unsustainable, as too socialist. "It's going
to be a very wrenching, painful process, as it was in Eastern Europe
after the fall of the Berlin Wall," he said.
"But won't that be very complicated and controversial?" I
asked. "Why not leave it up to the Iraqis?"
Bremer had come to Iraq to build not just a democracy but a free
market. He insisted that economic reform and political reform were
intertwined. "If we don't get their economy right, no matter how fancy
our political transformation, it won't work," he said.
(p. 78):
After accepting the job as CPA administrator, [Bremer] spent a week
in briefings and meetings at the Pentagon. He asked for proposals that
could be put into action right away. He heard about plans to repair
schools and power plants, but he knew Iraqis wouldn't see the results
immediately. Shooting looters on sight would be bold, and he even
proposed this at his first staff meeting in Baghdad, but he eventually
concluded that such an action would be too politically risky. Forming
an interim government at once, as Garner was trying to do, would be
significant, but Bremer feared that Iraqi political leaders weren't
ready. Then he heard about de-Baathification.
Bremer had concluded on his own that senior members of Saddam's
Baath Party would have to be purged, and that lower-ranking members
would have to renounce their affiliation. He compared it to the
de-Nazification undertaken by the Allies after World War II. But he
didn't know much about the Baath Party's structure and operations.
Bremer evidently didn't know much about de-Nazification
either. Immediately after the war, the Americans and Russians were
scrambling to hire ex-Nazis, especially if they knew how to build
rockets or might be useful spying on each other. As soon as the
Germans could, they quietly abandoned the rest of the program.
(p. 80):
Feith's office drafted a one-and-a-half-page executive order titled
"De-Baathification of Iraqi Society." Not only did it include a
prohibition on employing firkas [the fourth level down in the
Baath hierarchy: group members] and above, but it also banned regular
members from "holding positions in the top three layers of management
in every national government ministry, affiliated corporations and
other government institutions." The document was shown to Pentagon
lawyers and to Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld but not to Rice or Powell, who
believed the policy drafted in Feith's office did not represent the
compromise forged at the March 10 war cabinet meeting. The final draft
was printed in the Pentagon and carried to Baghdad by one of Bremer's
aides.
Bremer's first meeting with the exiled Iraqi political leaders:
Ahmed Chalabi, Ayad Allawi, Ibrahim al-Jafari, Abdul Aziz al-Hakim,
Jalal Talabani, Massoud Barzani, Adnan Pachachi (pp. 88-89):
After an opening round of pleasantries, Bremer got right to the
point. There would be no interim government. The United States was not
going to be ending its occupation anytime soon. He was the viceroy,
and he was in charge. When one of the exiles interrupted him to say
that Iraqis wanted Iraqis in charge, not Americans, he bristled. "You
don't represent the country," he said.
It was a breathtaking volte-face in American policy. Bremer and his
aides tried to fob the responsibility off on the White House, but it
was the viceroy's decision. Before he left Washington, everyone had
sought to influence his political plan. Doug Feith had urged him to
form an exile-led interim government. Paul Wolfowitz had urged him to
hold elections as soon as possible. State had urged him to convene
caucuses aimed at promising internal candidates. Bush, however, har
urged Bremer to take stock of the situation and make his own
judgments. The president told Bremer to slow it down if he needed
to. The goal, Bush said, was to create an interim administration that
represented the Iraqi people.
(p. 95):
The Iraqi police were almost nonexistent. They had fled their
stations as American troops converged on Baghdad. Most were at
home. Some had even joined the orgy of looting. The few who had
reported back to work were too scared to enforce the law. They had
pistols. The criminals had AK-47s.
It didn't take long for the experts to conclude that more than
6,600 foreign police advisers should be sent to Iraq immediately.
The White House dispatched just one: Bernie Kerik.
(p. 131):
The neoconservative architects of the war -- Wolfowitz, Feith,
Rumsfeld, and Cheney -- regarded wholesale economic change in Iraq as
an integral part of the American mission to remake the country. To
them, a free economy and a free society went hand in hand. If the
United States were serious about having democracy flourish in Iraq, it
would have to teach Iraqis a whole new way of doing business -- the
American way.
The CPA appointed Peter McPherson, president of Michigan State
University and a Cheney friend, as economic policy director
(pp. 135-137):
To McPherson, looting was a form of much-needed shrinkage. If the
theft of government property promoted private enterprise -- such as
when Baghdad's municipal bus drivers began driving their own routes
and pocketing the fees -- it was a positive development in his
view. "I thought the privatization that occurs sort of naturally when
somebody took over their state vehicle, or began to drive a truck that
the state used to own, was just fine," he said. Fellow CPA officials
were aghast. Hundreds of police cars had been stolen and turned into
private taxis -- good for the private sector but bad for law
enforcement. The same problem plagued the Ministry of Trade's
food-distribution system. Many of the trucks that had transported
monthly rations were being used to haul private reconstruction
supplies. "The Robin Hood philosophy might have sounded good to the
economists inside the palace," one CPA ministry adviser said, "but
when you looked at the real-world impact, it was lunacy."
McPherson also believed that his shrinkage strategy would help to
address a vexing issue for his economic team. Nobody could be sure how
much money various state-owned enterprises had in the bank -- or how
big their debts were. Bank records had been destroyed, as well as
files at the Ministry of Industry. How much did the state oil company
owe the al-Faris Company for products that had been delivered before
the war? How much did al-Faris, in turn, owe the State Company for
Iron and Steel Products? And what did that firm owe the government
mining company? Sorting through everyone's assets and obligations
would require a battalion of accountants. Borrowing a term suggested
by Walt Slocombe, the architect of the dissolution of the army,
McPherson called that challenge a "hopeless entanglement."
[ . . . ]
McPherson advocated a clean-slate approach. All debts and assets
would be nullified. State-owned enterprises would start from
scratch.
This decision effectively bankrupted all Iraqi state enterprises,
even ones that had previously established their economic viability.
(pp. 140-141):
With privatization abandoned in favor of shrinkage, McPherson
turned his attention to other policies designed to create a capitalist
utopia in the Middle East. He persuaded Bremer, who shared his dream
of a vibrant priate sector, to eliminate import duties. Saddam's
government had charged taxes as much as 200 percent on some imported
luxury products. With no more fees, truckloads of cars, televisions,
and air conditioners were shipped into Iraq from every neighboring
country. Baghdad's Karrada Street, the capital's main shopping
boulevard, was lined with new vehicles and electronic appliances for
sale. Curious Iraqis pawed the products. Wealthier ones removed the
dollars they had been hiding under their mattresses and purchased the
newly arrived goods, which had long been out of their reach. The scene
was just what the press strategists at the White House had long
sought: liberated Iraqis reveling in a free market.
Emboldened, McPherson became even more ambitious. He seized upon
the tax code -- without waiting for the BearingPoint consultants --
and took an ax to it. He slashed Iraq's top tax rate for individuals
and businesses from 45 percent to a flat 15 percent. It was the sort
of tax overhaul that fiscal conservatives long dreamed of implementing
in the United States. No matter that most Iraqis never bothered to pay
taxes. The details would be worked out later by BearingPoint, whose
contract required them to develop a program to assign Iraqis taxpayer
identification numbers.
The centerpiece of McPherson's agenda was a new foreign-investment
law. Iraq, like almost all of its neighbors, restricted the degree to
which foreigners could participate in the local economy. In most
cases, a foreigner could own no more than 49 percent of a
business. The rule, designed to protect indigenous firms, was out of
sync with the globalizing world economy, but it played to the Iraqi
public's conspiratorial, xenophobic fears that investors from Israel
would seek to take over Iraqi companies. To McPherson, though, foreign
investment was key to economic recovery. The way to create jobs, he
reasoned, was to lure multinational firms into Iraq with the promise
of being able to own not just 49 percent, but 100 percent, of the
businesses they established. He figured that they would set up
factories that would employ thousands of Iraqis, obviating the need
for the CPA to resuscitate many state-owned firms. He pitched his idea
to Bremer, who became an early convert.
(pp. 143-144):
A month before McPherson left, Bremer told him he would no longer
have to worry about private-sector development. That job would belong
to Thomas Foley, an investment banker and a major Republican Party
donor who had been President Bush's classmate at Harvard Business
School.
A week after arriving, Foley told a contractor from BearingPoint
that he intended to privatize all of Iraq's state-owned enterprises
within thirty days.
"Tom, there are a couple of problems with that," the contractor
said. "The first is an international law that prevents the sale of
assets by an occupation government."
"I don't care about any of that stuff," Foley told the contractor,
according to her recollection of the conversation. "I don't give a
shit about international law. I made a commitment to the president
that I'd privatize Iraq's businesses."
When the contractor tried to object again, Foley cut her off.
"Let's go have a drink," he said.
(p. 149):
SAIC had been contracted by the Pentagon to run the Iraqi Media
Network (IMN), which would comprise the national television station, a
national radio station, and a newspaper printed six times a week. SAIC
had no experience running media operations in a post-conflict
environment; it specialized in designing computer systems for the
Defense Department and intelligence agencies. Nevertheless, the
Pentagon offered the Iraqi media contract to SAIC without inviting
other firms to bid. The contract was written by Doug Feith's
office. Feith's deputy, Christopher Ryan Henry, had been a vice
president at SAIC before joining the Pentagon. SAIC hired Robert
Reilly, a former Voice of America director, to head the IMN
project. During the Reagan administration, Reilly had headed a White
House information operations campaign in Nicaragua to drum up support
for the Contra rebels.
Don North's first task for SAIC was completed on American soil. He
helped produce a documentary about Saddam's crimes against humanity
that the U.S. government wanted to broadcast in Muslim nations to
build support for the war. When it was finished, North asked his new
bosses what he could do to prepare to run Iraq's television
station. "But they said, 'Okay, Don, you can do whatever you want
right now. We'll see you again in Baghdad, after the fall of
Baghdad,'" he recalled. "I said, 'Yeah, isn't there something we can
be doing? Planning? I mean, in my experience it takes years to plan
programming and structure for a new TV and radio station.'
"'No. No. We got a few people that will be buying equipment. We're
not quite sure what we'll find when we get to Baghdad, but don't worry
about it.'"
When North arrived in Kuwait, he took stock of the equipment that
SAIC had purchased. There were thirteen tripods, but all lacked a base
plate upon which a camera could sit. The receiver for satellite
transmissions didn't have a power cord. Nothing had instruction
booklets. "It was like they bought everything from a flea market in
London," North said.
(p. 185):
When it came to economic reform, Bremer and his policy planners
weren't daunted by the challenges Glenn Corliss and Brad Jackson were
facing with the Ministry of Industry. Privatization of state-owned
enterprises was to begin by October. A trust fund modeled after one in
the state of Alaska was to be established to provide Iraqis with
annual cash rebates from oil sales. Monthly food rations were to be
converted into cash payments by November. The food subsidies, along
with below-market prices for gasoline and electricity, were to be
eliminated after February. Iraq was to prepare to join the World Trade
Organization, which meant the elimination of tariffs, the creation of
new laws to protect businesses, and the entry of foreign-owned
banks. "It's a full-scale economic overhaul," Bremer said. "We're
going to create the first real free-market economy in the Arab
world."
(p. 187):
John Agresto arrived in Iraq with two suitcases, a feather pillow,
and a profusion of optimism. His title was senior adviser to the
Ministry of Higher Education, but he envisioned the job in grander
terms. It was not just to oversee but to overhaul the country's
university system. He wanted to introduce the concept of academic
freedom and to open liberal arts colleges. He hoped to restock
libraries with the latest books and to wire classrooms with high-speed
Internet connections. He regarded the postwar looting, which had
eviscerated many campuses, as a benefit. It provided "the opportunity
for a clean start" and was a chance to give Iraqis "the best modern
equipment."
(p. 189):
Agresto knew next to nothing about Iraq's educational system. Even
after he was selected, the former professor didn't read a single book
about Iraq. "I wanted to come here with as open a mind as I could
have," he said. "I'd much rather learn firsthand than have it filtered
to me by an author."
Robert Blackwill was a State Department diplomat thrown into the
planning for establishing some sort of Iraqi constitution and
goverment, an issue where the CPA was at loggerheads with Ayatollah
al-Sistani, who insisted on elections of Iraqis to write the
constitution (p. 233):
With the caucus plan imploding, [Blackwill] viewed the United
Nations as America's best hope in Iraq. He began lobbying Rice,
Powell, and others in the administration to back al-Hakim's
request.
The fight betwen Blackwill and the CPA over UN involvement was so
acrimonious that when he returned to Baghdad in January, he no longer
trusted aides in the palace to transmit his secure messages to Rice in
Washington; he brought his own communications team from the White
House. [ . . . ]
Blackwill's choice to lead the United Nations team was former
Algerian foreign minister Lakhdar Brahimi. Bremer's political advisers
regarded Brahimi as an anti-American Arab nationalist who might
manipulate the process in ways that did not serve American
interests. But Blackwill was insistent. He was impressed with the work
Brahimi had done as the UN's point man in Afghanistan after the United
States ousted the Taliban. He eventually invited Brahimi to the White
House for meetings with Rice, Powell, and, finally, Bush.
(pp. 238-239):
The story of Yarmouk Hospital was the same as that of nearly every
other public institution in Iraq. In the 1970s, it had been one of the
best medical centers in the Arab world. Jordanians, Syrians, and
Sudanese traveled to Baghdad for operations. That changed, of course,
after the invasion of Kuwait and the imposition of sanctions. Although
Saddam eventually won the right to sell his oil in exchange for food
and humanitarian supplies, the hospital never had enough medicine. The
government blamed the United Nations for screwing up the purchase
orders. The United Nations blamed the government for ordering the wrong
items and for steering contracts to cronies instead of to reputable
suppliers. The Bush administration believed that Saddam's government,
which was trying to generate international support to overturn the
sanctions, was deliberately depriving Yarmouk and other hospitals of
needed supplies.
However bad the place was before the Americans arrived, it got
much, much worse when the U.S. Army rolled into the city.A tank shell
struck the hospital the day Saddam's government fell, knocking out the
generator and sending doctors fleeing home. With nobody to watch over
the building, looters carted away not just all the beds, medicines,
and operating room equipment, but also the CT and ultrasound
scanners. When doctors returned to work, they struggled to provide
basic first aid with makeshift implements.
(pp. 239-240):
Once the Americans arrived, the job of rehabilitating Iraq's
health-care system fell to Frederick M. Burkle, Jr., a physician with
a master's degree in public health and postgraduate degrees from
Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth, and the University of California at
Berkeley. Burkle was a naval reserve officer with two Bronze Stars and
a deputy assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International
Development. He taught at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,
where he specialized in disaster-response issues. During the first
Gulf War , he provided medical aid to Kurds in northern Iraq. He had
worked in Kosovo and Somalia. And in the lead-up to the invasion of
Iraq, he had been put in charge of organizing the American response to
the expected public health crisis in Iraq. A USAID colleague called
him the "single most talented and experienced post-conflict health
specialist working for the United States government."
A week after Baghdad's liberation, Burkle was informed that he was
being replaced. A senior official at USAID told him that the White
House wanted a "loyalist" in the job. Burkle had a wall of degrees,
but he didn't have a picture of himself with the president.
Burkle's job was handed to James K. Haveman, Jr., a sixty-year-old
social worker who was largely unknown among international health
experts. He had no medical degree, but he had connections. He had been
the community health director for the former Republican governor of
Michigan, John Engler, who recommended him to Wolfowitz. Haveman was
well-traveled, but most of his overseas trips were in his capacity as
a director of International Aid, a faith-based relief organization
that provided health care while promoting Christianity in the
developing world. Prior to his stint in government, Havemanran a large
Christian adoption agency in Michigan that urged pregnant women not to
have abortions.
(p. 242):
[Haveman] approached problems the way a health-care administrator
in America would: He focused on prevention measures to reduce the need
for hospital treatment. He urged the Health Ministry to mount an
antismoking campaign, and he assigned an American from the CPA team,
who turned out to be a closet smoker, to lead the public-education
effort. Several members of Haveman's team noted wryly that Iraqis
faced far greater dangers in their daily life than a little
tobacco. The CPA's limited resources, they argued, would be better
used raising awareness about how to prevent childhood diarrhea and
other fatal maladies. I was reminded of a comment made by my
Information Ministry minder before the war, when I asked him why a
pack of cigarettes cost only about thirty cents.
"Ali, your government keeps complaining that it doesn't have enough
money," I said. "Why don't they tax cigarettes like they do in
America?"
"In our country," Ali said, "it would not be wise to tax a
tranquilizer."
(p. 258):
The CPA's economic team had no shortage of ambition. They began
studying the feasibility of giving each family a debit card loaded
with the cash value of all the rations they were due. The cards would
be automatically replenished each month. Otwell was aghast. Nobody in
Iraq used credit cards. There were no automated teller machines. Phone
service and electrical power were unavailable for much of the day. How
did the CPA expect merchants to process debit cards? Who would
purchase the processing equipment? To Otwell, it was another crazy
ivory-tower scheme invented in the Emerald City.
Bremer agreed to implement this scheme by the sovereignty
handover date. The scheme wasn't implemented. It was killed by
the US military, stretched thin enough without having to face
food riots.
(p. 312):
Some of [the CPA staffers] began to question the management of Iraq
outside the walls of the Green Zone. Taking on al-Sadr at the same
time the marines were attacking Fallujah seemed ill-conceived. "Did we
have to go after him right now?" one senior CPA official told me at
the time. "It should have been delayed. Dealing with both these
problems at one time is crazy, if not suicidal."
(p. 326):
But where the CPA saw progress, Iraqis saw broken promises. As
Bremer prepared to depart, electricity generation remained stuck at
around 4,000 megawatts -- resulting in less than nine hours of power a
day to most Baghdad homes -- instead of the 6,000 megawatts he had
pledged to provide. The new army had fewer than 4,000 trained
soldiers, a third of what he had promised. Only 15,000 Iraqis had been
hired to work on reconstructions projects funded with the
Supplemental, rather than the 250,000 that had been touted. Seventy
percent of police officers on the street had not received any
CPA-funded training. Attacks on American forces and foreign civilians
averaged more than forty a day, a threefold increase sine
January. Assassinations of political leaders and sabotage of the
country's oil and electricity infrastructure occurred almost daily. In
a CPA-sponsored poll of Iraqis taken a few weeks before the handover
of sovereignty, 85 percent of respondents said they lacked confidence
in Bremer's occupation administration.
Because of bureaucratic delays, only 2 percent of the $18.4 billion
Supplemental had been spent. Nothing had been expended on
construction, health care, sanitation, or the provision of clean
water, and more money had been devoted to administration than all
projects related to education, human rights, democracy, and governance
combined. At the same time, the CPA had managed to dole out almost all
of a $20 billion development fund fed by Iraq's oil sales, more than
$1.6 billion of which had been used to pay Halliburton, primarily for
trucking fuel into Iraq.
(p. 328):
The day after my interview with Bremer, I met Adel Abdel-Mahdi for
breakfast in the front courtyard of his modest house. As we nibbled
from a plate of dates and pastries, I asked him what the CPA's biggest
mistake had been. He didn't hesitate: "The biggest mistake of the
occupation," he said, "was the occupation itself."
He, of course, had wanted the United States to anoint exiled
politicians as Iraq's new rulers in April 2003. But his self-interest
aside, what he said was true. Freed from the grip of their dictator,
the Iraqis believed that they should have been free to chart their own
destiny, to select their own interim government, and to manage the
reconstruction of their shattered nation. Their country wasn't Germany
or Japan, a thoroughly defeated World War II aggressor to be ruled by
the victorious. Iraqis needed help -- good advice and ample resources
-- from a support corps of well-meaning foreigners, not a full-scale
occupation with imperial Americans cloistered in a palace of the
tyrant, eating bacon and drinking beer, surrounded by Gurkhas and
blast walls.
This is the first of several posts on Iraq books. For more, an
indication of what I've read on the subject, see
here.
Evan Wright: Generation Kill: Devil Dogs, Iceman, Captain America,
and the New Face of American War (2004; paperback, 2005, Berkeley)
Wright was embedded with the Marines, First Reconnaissance Battalion
during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. First Recon led what turned out to be
a feint up the middle of the Tigris-Euphrates valley to Al-Kut while the
main Marines force moved up further west. Wright's book covers what he
saw with First Recon all the way to Baghdad, plus a further detour to
Baqubah in the "Sunni Triangle" northeast of Baghdad. The time framework
is roughly up to Bush's "Mission Accomplished" milestone event, which is
to say he only covers the "feel good" days of the war, not the long rot
that followed.
I previously read
Cobra II by
Michael Gordon and Gen. Bernard Trainor, which covered the military
campaign as a whole from the far distant headquarters where Gordon
was embedded. Wright's book offers a tiny piece of that story, but
it's far more realistic in terms of what the war looked like on the
ground. There have been hundreds of battlefield memoirs from the war
campaign -- in fact there is another memoir of this same campaign,
by Nathaniel Fick, a Lieutenant in First Recon, One Bullet Away:
The Making of a Marine Officer. I never had much interest in
this level of reporting, not least because my sympathy level for
US soldiers is zero, but Michael Massing wrote a detailed review of
Wright's and Fick's books in The New York Review of Books
(Dec. 20, 2007), and that piqued my interest. While Wright bonds
with these Marines, he casts a sharp view on what they're up to.
I marked a quote from Massing's review (p. 86):
Wright's account of this attack is exceptional. In the thousands of
reports written about the invasion, few dwelled on the enormous
destruction it caused. Even most of the retrospective analyses
downplay this aspect of the war. A good example is Cobra II: The
Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq, by New
York Times reporter Michael R. Gordon and General Bernard
E. Trainor. The authors meticulously and convincingly document many
"grievous errors" that the Bush administration and the Pentagon
committed in planning and executing the war. Yet when it comes to
describing the invasion itself, their writing is oddly
bloodless. Attacks tend to be referred to in a fleeting blur of
acronym-laden aircraft and tanks, armored vehicles and munitions, with
acts of destruction sequestered in brief euphemistic phrases. Here are
some examples from the book (with emphases added):
As Sanderson's battalion prepared to advance up Highway 1, it
came under Iraqi artillery fire. Within minutes, Lieutenant Colonel
Doug Harding unleashed a barrage of lethal counterfire. This was the
first significant artillery duel of the war. The Americans got the
better of the exchange, suppressing Iraqi fire for the time
being.
McElhiney realized he would have to fight in close quarters and
destroy the Iraqi air defenses one at a time. Using 30mm guns and
rockets, he took out the mosque.
The regiment's 2nd LAR and Recon moved on the town border,
which was skillfully and tenaciously defended. Covered by
Cobras, the Marines headed north to the town from the western side
of the Gharraf River, paralleling Highway 7. Craparotta's 3/1 moved up
and . . . cleared the town.
The town referred to in this last passage is Muwaffaqiyah -- the
same place Wright describes as having been partly flattened by
Marines. The brief, bald description in Cobra II of
Muwaffaqiyah as being "cleared" conveys none of the horror,
devastation, and death that, according to Generation Kill,
accompanied the attack. Unlike Wright, Gordon and Trainor were not
present for the attack. In seeking to reconstruct it, they relied
heavily on interviews with the soldiers who carried it out and who had
little incentive to dwell on the unarmed Iraqis who might have died as
a result of their actions. Written from the perspective of those
planning and executing the invasion, Cobra II -- like so many
other accounts -- tells us little of what it was like to be on the
receiving end of the violence.
These are quotes from Wright's book. Most of the names are soldiers
in First Recon (p. 2):
Get some! is the unofficial Marine Corps cheer. It's shouted
when a brother Marine is struggling to beat his personal best in a
fitness run. It punctuates stories told at night about getting laid in
whorehouses in Thailand and Australia. It's the cry of exhilaration
after firing a burst from a .50-caliber machine gun. Get some!
expresses, in two simple words, the excitement, the fear, the feelings
of power and the erotic-tinged thrill that come from confronting the
extreme physical and emotional challenges posed by death, which is, of
course, what war is all about. Nearly every Marine I've met is hoping
this war with Iraq will be his chance to get some.
(p. 5):
Culturally, these Marines would be virtually unrecognizable to
their forebears in the "Greatest Generation." They are kids raised on
hip-hop, Marilyn Manson and Jerry Springer. For them, "motherfucker"
is a term of endearment. For some, slain rapper Tupac is an American
patriot whose writings are better known than the speeches of Abraham
Lincoln. There are tough guys among them who pray to Buddha and quote
Eastern philosophiesand New Age precepts gleaned from watching Oprah
and old kung fu movies. There are former gangbangers, a sprinkling of
born-again Christians and quite a few guys who before entering the
Corps were daily dope smokers; many of them dream of the day when they
get out and are once again united with their beloved bud.
These young men represent what is more or less America's first
generation of disposable children. More than half of the guys in the
platoon come from broken homes and were raised by absentee, single,
working parents. Many are on more intimate terms with video games,
reality TV shows, and Internet porn than they are with their own
parents. Before the "War on Terrorism" began, not a whole lot was
expected of this generation other than the hope that those in it would
squeak through high school without pulling too many mass shootings in
the manner of Columbine.
(p. 24):
What unites them is an almost reckless desire to test themselves in
the most extreme circumstances. In many respects the life they have
chosen is a complete rejection of the hyped, consumerist American
dream as it is dished out in reality TV shows and pop-song
lyrics. They've chosen asceticism over consumption. Instead of
celebrating their individualism, they've subjugated theirs to the
collective will of an institution. Their highest aspiration is
self-sacrifice over self-preservation.
There is idealism about their endeavor, but at the same time the
whole point of their training is to commit the ultimate taboo: to
kill. Their culture revels in this. At the end of team briefings,
Marines put their hands together and shout, "Kill!" In keeping with
the spirit of transgression, they also mock some of the most delicate
social conventions in America. The Hispanics in the platoon refer to
the white guys as "cracker-ass fucks," the white refer to them as
"muds" and to Spanish as "dirty spic talk," and they are the best of
friends.
(pp. 66-67):
Several of the men [Iraqi prisoners] claim they worked in special
units in charge of launching chemical-filled missiles. They say they
were moving their missiles just a few days ago, getting ready to
launch them. These men have atropine injectors, used to counteract
nerve agents, which normally would be carried by those handling such
chemicals. One of the more baffling aspects of the invasion is that
the Marines will encounter numerous Iraqis, both soldiers and
civilians, who claim to have firsthand knowledge of chemical
weapons. At times, Marines will speculate that Iraqis are fabricating
these stories in an attempt to curry favor by telling the Americans
what they want to hear. But farther north, they will encounter village
elders who seem quite sincere, pleading with the Marines to remove
weapons stocks they believe Saddam's military buried near their farms,
which they fear are poisoning their water. Given the fact that no such
weapons have been found, you get the idea Saddam or someone in his
government created the myth to keep the people and the military in awe
of his power.
On the road to Nasiriyah (p. 78):
Within an hour Colbert's team is mired in a massive traffic jam. We
stop about twenty kilometers south of Nasiriyah, amidst several
thousand Marine vehicles bunched up on the highway. We are parked
beside approximately 200 tractor-trailers hauling bulldozers, pontoon
sections and other equipment for building bridges. Among these are
numerous dump trucks hauling gravel. One has to marvel at the might --
or hubris -- of a military force that invades a sand- and rock-strewn
country but brings its own gravel.
(p. 81):
There are nearly 10,000 Marines parked on the road, as well as a
sprinkling of British troops who appear to be lost. Everyone defecates
and pisses out in the open beside the highway. Taking a shit is always
a big production in a war zone. There's the MOPP suit [protecting
against chemical weapons] to contend with, and no one wants to walk
too far from the road for fear of stepping on a land mine, since these
are known to be scattered haphazardly beside Iraqi highways. In the
civilian world, of course, utmost care is taken to perform bodily
functions in private. Public defecation is an act of shame, or even
insanity. In a war zone, it's the opposite. You don't want to wander
off by yourself. You could get shot by enemy snipers, or by Marines
when you're coming back into friendly lines. So everyone just squats
in the open a few meters from the road, often perching on empty wooden
grenade crates used as portable "shitters." Trash from thousands of
discarded MRE [meals ready to eat] packs litters the area. With
everyone lounging around, eating, sleeping, sunning, pooping, it looks
like some weird combat version of an outdoor rock festival.
(pp. 112-113):
For some reason reporters and antiwar groups concerned about
collateral damage in war seldom pay much attention to artillery. The
beauty of aircraft, coupled with their high-tech destructive power,
captures the imagination. From a news standpoint, jets flying through
the sky make for much more dramatic footage than images of cannons
parked in the mud, intermittently belching puffs of smoke.
But the fact is, the Marines rely much more on artillery
bombardment than on aircraft dropping precision-guided
munitions. During our thirty-six hours outside Nasiriyah, they have
already lobbed an estimated 2,000 rounds into the city. The impact of
this shelling on its 400,000 residents must be devastating.
It's not the first time the citizens of Nasiriyah have been screwed
by the Americans. On February 15, 1991, during the first Gulf War,
George H.W. Bush gave a speech at the UN in which he urged "the Iraqi
people to take matters into their own hands and force Saddam Hussein,
the dictator, to step aside." The U.S. military also dropped thousands
of leaflets on the country, urging the same. Few heeded this call more
than the citizens of Nasiriyah. While the Iraqi army was routed in
Kuwait, the mostly Shia populace of Nasiriyah led a coup against
Baathist leaders controlling the city. When Saddam's armed forces
subsequently came in to put down the uprising, they did so with the
tacit approval of the Americans, who allowed them to use helicopters
against the rebels. (The American administration at the time didn't
want to see Iraq torn apart by rebellion; Bush's call for an overthrow
of the government had merely been a ploy to tie up Iraq's armed forces
while the U.S. military prepared to battle them in Kuwait.) After the
resistance was quashed in Nasiriyah, months of bloody reprisals
followed, in which thousands of its citizens are believed to have been
killed.
In this war Marine intelligence analysts will later estimate that
their advance into Nasiriyah was stopped by between 3,000 and 5,000
Saddam loyalists. Despite America's dazzling high-tech capabilities --
the Marines move through Nasiriyah by blasting it to hell.
(p. 135):
What sticks out in his mind is not the intermittent enemy fire but
something which is, in the scheme of things, almost trivial. Shoup
sees an Arab standing in a doorway near where his vehicle is
passing. The man is tall, well dressed in a brown suit, and has a
close-cropped bears. He's smiling. Then Shoup sees a Marine officer he
knows stick the barrel of his Benelli twelve-gauge automatic shotgun
out the window of his vehicle and blast away at the man in the brown
suit. Shoup can't be sure it wasn't a legitimate kill -- perhaps he
failed to notice a weapon on the Arab -- but all he recalls seeing is
the man's smile before he was gunned down.
(pp. 147-148):
We leave the outskirts of Al Gharraf at about nine in the
morning. Two men standing by the road outside the shattered town grin
and give us the thumbs-up. "This place gives me the creeps," Colbert
says.
The pattern that's emerged -- being greeted with enthusiastic
cheers and waves by the people you see beside the roads, then shot at
by people you don't see behind walls and berms -- is beginning to wear
on the Marines. "These guys waving at us are probably the same ones
who were trying to kill us yesterday," Person says.
(p. 149):
We pass dead bodies in the road again, men with RPG tubes by their
sides, then more than a dozen trucks and cars burned and smoking. You
find most torched vehicles have charred corpses nearby, occupants who
crawled out and made it a few meters before expiring, with their
grasping hands still smoldering. We pass another car with a small,
mangled body outside it. It's another child, facedown, and the clothes
are too ripped to determine the gender. Seeing this is almost no
longer a big deal. Since the shooting started in Nasiriyah forty-eight
hours ago, firing weapons and seeing dead people has become almost
routine.
(p. 176):
However admirable the military's attempts are to create ROE [Rules
of Engagement], they basically create an illusion of moral order where
there is none. The Marines operate in chaos. It doesn't matter if a
Marine is following orders and ROE, or disregarding them. The fact is,
as soon as a Marine pulls the trigger on his rifle, he's on his
own. He's entered a game of moral chance. When it's over, he's as
likely to go down as a hero or as a baby killer. The only difference
between Trombley and any number of other Marines who've shot or killed
people they shouldn't have is that he got caught. And this only
happened because the battalion stopped moving long enough for the
innocent victims to catch up with it.
Much complaining about an officer in the squadron nicknamed Captain
America -- for one thing, he has a thing for bayonetting prisoners; here
he's collecting war porn (p. 197):
Now, sitting around waiting to begin their hunt for ambushes on the
route north, Carazales brings up the subject of Captain
America. "Driving for that motherfucker was jacked. Every time we'd
come across more of them fucked-up civilians -- he had to jump around
getting pictures, worried my driving was too fast for his Canon
stabilization system to work right."
"Man, I'm glad I didn't see any dead little children," Garza says.
"How do you think we would feel if someone came into our country
and lit us up like this?" Carazales says. "South of Al Gharraf I know
I shot a building with a bunch of civilians in it. Everyone else was
lighting it up. Then we found out there were civilians in there. It's
fucked up." Carazales works himself into a rage. "I think it's
bullshit how these fucking civilians are dying! They're worse off than
the guys that are shooting at us. They don't even have a chance. Do
you think people at home are going to see this -- all these women and
children we're killing? Fuck no. Back home they're glorifying this
motherfucker, I guarantee you. Saying our president is a fucking hero
for getting us into this bitch. He ain't even a real Texan."
Carazales slumps back in the dirt. No one says anything. Then he
brightens. "I just thought of a tight angle. All the pictures Captain
America's taking of shot-up, dead Iraqi kids? I'll get my hands on
those. I'm going to go back home and put them in Seven-Elevens and
collect money for my own adopt-an-Iraqi-kid program. Shit, I'll be
rolling in int. A war veteran helping out the kids. I ought to run for
office."
(p. 227):
After dark Patterson gets the clearest confirmation yet that the
Baath Party and Iraqi military forces have abandoned the
town. Through his NVGs [night vision gear] he observes hundreds of
people streaming in and out of government buildings "like ants,
carting off everything they can carry -- desks, chairs,
mattresses."
Iraqis aren't the only ones looting. Inside the water-purification
plant Fawcett watches fellow Marines "rape the buildings -- smashing
things up, pissing everywhere, hunting for souvenirs." The
water-purification plant must have been some sort of exemplary
public-works project. Much of the equipment is new. Many of the trucks
parked inside the buildings haven't even been driven; they still have
plastic on the seats. Marines use Ka-Bar knives to rip apart their
interiors for material to reupholster their Humvees and trucks.
After their exciting night at the water plant, the Marines leave
Ash Shatrah early in the morning. Locals cheer. To one of Patterson's
officers, "the change in the town was dramatic, like someone pulled a
thumb off their backs. We liberated them."
While the CIA mission failed, the liberation of Ash Shatrah proves
to be precedent-setting in another sense. The Marines pull out of the
town, leaving behind little or no civil authority, hordes of looters
roaming through blown-up, trashed buildings and a scattered army of
Baathists, soldiers and other loyalists, many of them still armed and
all of them completely unaccounted for. The type of liberation seen at
Ash Shatrah will play itself out again and again in other towns across
Iraq until the U.S. military reaches Baghdad, where it will do pretty
much the same, resulting in a much grander scale of anarchy.
(p. 274):
Colbert now wears an expression that I've come to see more
frequently. He looks helpless. When confronted with these small human
tragedies up close, some Marines shut down. Their faces go
blank. Despite his Iceman reputation, Colbert doesn't hide his
feelings very well. In combat he looks almost ecstatic; now he appears
overwhelmed, though still trying to deal with this situation. He hands
the baby back to the mother, along with a water bottle. "Put water on
the little one," he says, speaking English into the mother's
uncomprehending face. She nods gratefully, perhaps thinking he's done
more than he actually has to help. Despite the water the Marines hand
out, Doc Bryan estimates that a quarter of the infants may die in the
next twenty-four hours.
(pp. 287-288):
Several Marines in the platoon are suffering from the fever and
dysentery that has plagued the unit since leaving Nasiriyah. But
spirits are high as they load their vehicles. "I'm scared as fuck,"
Lilley tells me. "But I started getting anxious here in this
camp. It's weird. I feel better knowing we're going to go shoot things
again and fuck shit up again."
"Fuck, yeah!" Person says. "It beats sitting around doing nothing
while everybody else gets to have fun attacking Baghdad."
One thing the Marine Corps can bank on is the low tolerance for
boredom among American youth. They need constant stimulation, more
than late-night bull sessions, ravioli fiestas and Colbert's now
shredded, dog-eared copy of Juggs can provide. They need more
war.
The corrollary to this is that whenever they go out, they turn
whatever they find into war. On patrol in Baghdad (p. 325):
Marines rifle through everything, looking for souvenirs, but all
they find are colored pens and coffee mugs. "It's all stupid crap,"
one of them says, slamming his wrench into a computer screen.
The Marines kick down the door to what looks like the boss's office
in the corner. One of them sits behind the expansive wooden desk,
punches buttons on the speakerphone and plays boss. "Have my secretary
send in my next appointment," he says in an obnoxiously official
voice.
Then he starts smashing th phone and the desk apart with his
wrench. The Marines destroy the boss's office with gleeful vengeance,
throwing stuff at the walls, pissing in the corner, all of them
maniacally laughing. In a weird way, they're living out the fantasy
Carazales often talks about -- in which one day a year the blue-collar
man gets to go into rich neighborhoods and smash apart expensive
homes.
(pp. 326-327):
Residents assail him with a list of other problems -- lack of
electricity, running water, broken phone lines, ransacked hospitals,
bandits coming in at night and robbing homes, even the dearth of
jobs. They expect the Americans, who so handily beat Saddam, will take
care of everything. The Marines shake their hands, promise to see them
again soon, and drive off, heroes for the day.
They never return to the neighborhood.
(pp. 327-328):
The basic problem with the American occupation of liberated Baghdad
is that the fighting is so heavy at night, most U.S. forces decide not
to go out after dark. On their third day in Baghdad, Fick tells his
men, "We're not going out at night. There are too many revenge
killings going on in the city. Mostly it's Shias doing a lot of dirty
work, taking out Fedayeen and Sunni Baathists."
Lt. Col. Ferrando takes this even further, telling his senior men
that the Shias are wiping out paramilitary forces through "a sort of
an agreement" with the American occupiers. "We have to be careful
about nighttime operations," he tells his men, "because the Shias will
be out doing the same things you are. They might want to engage
you."
An internal Marine intelligence report I come across, dated April
12, confidently predicts that the ability of hostile forces in Baghdad
"to successfully and continually engage out forces will be complicated
by the local Shias' intolerance for regime paramilitary forces hiding
out in their neighborhoods."
The Americans' assumption seems to be that all they need to do in
Baghdad is sit back and let the Shias clean house. Not only do the
Americans tolerate this bloodshed, but at least one Marine commander
in an infantry unit working in Saddam City allegedly distributes
stocks of confiscated AKs to Shia leaders who promise to use them to
rout out the "bad guys."
Sadi Ali Hossein is a translator working with Lt. Fick
(pp. 328-329):
With his help as a translator today, Fick tries to find out what
the neighborhood requires. Initially, elders who emerge from the mob
tell Fick they need just two things: water and statues of George Bush,
which they plan to erect up and down the streets as soon as the
Americans help them pump out the sewage currently flowing in them.
Fick turns to the translator with a puzzled expression on his
face. Hossein explains, "They think Bush is a ruler like Saddam. They
don't understand the idea of a president who maybe the next year will
go out."
The streets below not only run with sewage but are filled with
uncollected garbage. In the midst of this, there are pools of stagnant
rainwater. Somehow, locals differentiate between pools of stagnant
rainwater and sewage, since they dip buckets into the former and drink
it.
They say they haven't had water or electricity in the neighborhood
for a few years now. What the elders urgently need help with is
security at night. All of them have the same story: As soon as the sun
goes down, bandits roam the streets, robbing people and carrying out
home invasions. Residents in the neighborhood have set up barricades
on the streets to keep them out. Everyone is armed. The locals claim
that since armories and police stations were overrun at the end of the
war, an AK now costs about the same as a couple of packs of
cigarettes.
"They kill our houses," one of the men says.
"The Americans have let Ali Baba into Baghdad," his friend adds.
Another man claims enemies from an outlying neighborhood have set
up a mortar position behind a mosque and are randomly shelling them at
night.
Even late in the morning, you can still smell cordite in the
streets from all the gunfire of the previous night. What's striking
about the residents' complaints is the fact that the Marine commanders
have been claiming that all the gunfire at night is a result of Shias
removing Fedayeen and other enemies they share with the
Americans. But this is a 100-percent Shia neighborhood, and these
people are clearly distraught by the violence. They ask Fick if his
Marines will stay for the night.
He tells them that is not possible, but that his men will try to
bring water some other day.
Hossein tells me he has a grim view of Iraq's future. "You have
taken this country apart," he says. "And you are not putting it
together." He believes that the violence the Americans are allowing to
go on at night will only fuel conflicts between the Sunni and Shia
factions. "Letting vigilantes and thieves out at night will not
correct the problems of Saddam's rule," he says. He gestures toward
the crowded slum below, teeming with people. "This is a bomb," he
says. "If it explodes, it will be bigger than the war."
(p. 333):
Fick's talk a week earlier at the cigarette factory of giving his
men a purpose by restoring order in Iraq seems like ancient
history. Fick appears to have lost his belief in his mission here. The
problem is not so much that the city has unraveled before his eyes in
the past week -- he pretty much expected Baghdad to be in total
chaos. Instead, what's come undone is his belief that the Americans
have any kind of occupation plan to remedy the situation. "Our impact
on establishing order is just about zero," he says. "As far as I can
see, there's no American plan for Baghdad. Maybe it's coming, but I
don't see any signs of it." But he adds, leaving room for optimism, "A
platoon commander's situational awareness doesn't extend very
far."
(pp. 335-336):
Colbert despairs when he hears reports of other units accidentally
firing on civilians. One episode reported on the BBC enrages
him. U.S. soldiers, newly arrived in Iraq to begin the occupation,
accidentally slaughtered several Iraqi children playing on abandoned
tanks. Under the ROE, the children were technically "armed" since they
were on tanks, so the GIs opened fire. Maj. Gen. Mattis would later
call this shooting "the most calamitous engagement of the war." After
he hears of it, Colbert rails, "They are screwing this up. Those
fucking idiots. Don't they realize the world already hates us?"
Espera tries to console him by sharing some wisdom he learned on
the streets of L.A. Espera explains that if he were writing a memoir
of his days as a car repo man before joining the Marines, he would
title it Nobody Gives a Fuck. According to Espera, the ideal
place and time to repossess or steal an automobile is a crowded
parking lot in the middle of the afternoon. "Jump in, drive that bitch
off with the car alarm going -- nobody's going to stop you, nobody's
going to even look at you," he says. "You know why? Nobody gives a
fuck. In my line of work, that was the key to everything. The only
people that will fuck you up are do-gooders. I can't stand
go-gooders."
As Colbert continues to fulminate over mounting civilian casualties
and their effect on undermining the American victory, Espera throws
his arm over his shoulder. "Relax, Devil Dog," Espera says. "The only
thing we have to worry about are the fucking do-gooders. Luckily,
there's not too many of those.
(p. 346):
Up until now, no one has known the name of the war they've been
fighting. Gunny Wynn passes on the rumor that he thinks they might be
calling it "Iraqi Freedom." Hearing the news, Carazales scoffs. "Fuck
that. I'll tell you what 'freedom' was, Phase Three Iraq," he says,
referring to the military's term for the combat-operations phase of
the invasion. "That was fucking Iraqi freedom. Rip through this bitch
shooting anything that moves from your window. That's what I call
freedom."
Massing's review quotes a later interview with Wright where Wright
says:
For the past decade, we've been steeped in the lore of The
Greatest Generation, the title of Tom Brokaw's book about the men
who fought World War II, and a lot of people have developed this
romanticism about that war. They tend to remember it from the
Life magazine images of the sailor coming home and kissing his
fiancée. They've forgotten that war is about killing. I really think
it's important as a society to be reminded of this, because you now
have a generation of baby boomers, a lot of whom didn't serve in Viet
Nam. Many of them protested it. But now they've grown up, and as
they've gotten older I think many of them have grown tired of the
ambiguities and the lack of moral clarity of Viet Nam, and they've
started to cling to this myth of World War II, the good war.
I never read Tom Brokaw's book, but if you go back and look at the
actual greatest generation writers, people like Kurt Vonnegut -- who
wrote Slaughterhouse Five -- and Joseph Heller, Norman Mailer,
and their contemporaries, who actually fought in World War II and
wrote about it, there's no romance at all. In fact, a lot of their
work is very anti-war.
|