I couldn’t agree more with Liam that there’s nothing like a good blog Stoush?Ñ¢.
So in that spirit, a thesis for discussion – again from Tariq Ali.
Ali argues that the justification for overthrowing Saddam in terms of regime change because he was a dictatorial criminal is completely invalid. It would have been better, Ali suggests, to have allowed the people of Iraq to dispose of him in their own time. The argument here is that what then emerges as an alternate regime, though imperfect (as all regimes are), would organically have developed from the politics and desires of the Iraqi people themselves. Thus the current chaos would have been avoided. Ali’s example is the regime of Suharto in Indonesia. It’s not well known enough that working with the CIA Suharto organised the murder of around 1,000,000 people belonging to organisations associated with the PKI (Indonesian Communist Party) in the mid 1960s. He was certainly never taken to task by the West for this enormous massacre. One side effect, as in many Middle Eastern countries, was to leave a certain field clear for radical Islamists to operate in – by wiping out the secular opposition. However, despite the continuing ramifications in the form of groups like JI, the Indonesian people eventually in their own good time got rid of Suharto, and further developments in the direction of democracy are welcome. That’s not to say that Indonesia should not be criticised – and certainly continuing issues in West Papua, Aceh and continued military interference in politics and corruption are troubling. But Indonesian regime change has not resulted in a failed state like the shaky regime presently occupying the place of sovereignty in Iraq.
Discuss.
A good post Mark. Don’t want to nitpick but it is, or rather was, Partai Kommunist Indonesia (PKI). A million deaths in 1965/6 is probably an exaggeration, most research I have done suggests its around 500, 000 so I would say that 1 million is perhaps the upper limit. Suharto never wiped out the secular opposition per se, what he wouldn’t tolerate was radical Islam taking over so the allowed parties became Golkar, his lot of crony capitalists, PDI eventually taken over by Suharto puppets on the to rapid rise in popularity of the non-entity Megawati Sukarnoputri and the nominal Islamic Party whose acronyn I have just forgotten. Golkar always won a majority not by rigging so much as by coercion right down to the village level where Golkar (and TNI) had its roots.
The basic deal was, don’t rock the boat, become complicit in the KKN (Korrupsi, Kollusi dan Nepotisme) and all is sweet. Real opposition only came with the economic crisis in 1997/8 ie there was never a real threat from fundamentalists since the inception of the Orde Bahru (New Order) Suharto regime. The very existence of communist PKI support illustrated a non-secular aspect at odds with the misperception these days of a seething 200 million mass of fundamentalists.
The way things have turned out in Indonesia suggests a level of evolution that perhaps the ME can emulate as viable although somewhat slow in reform. Corruption takes a long time to eliminate. It took Lee Quan Yew 30 years to do so in tiny easily controllable Singapore so westerners who slag off without knowing the history of Indonesia and the exploitative Dutch , and I’m referring to conspicuous indignation Corby type supporters, should tone it down.
A good post Mark. Don’t want to nitpick but it is, or rather was, Partai Kommunist Indonesia (PKI). A million deaths in 1965/6 is probably an exaggeration, most research I have done suggests its around 500, 000 so I would say that 1 million is perhaps the upper limit. Suharto never wiped out the secular opposition per se, what he wouldn’t tolerate was radical Islam taking over so the allowed parties became Golkar, his lot of crony capitalists, PDI eventually taken over by Suharto puppets on the to rapid rise in popularity of the non-entity Megawati Sukarnoputri and the nominal Islamic Party whose acronyn I have just forgotten. Golkar always won a majority not by rigging so much as by coercion right down to the village level where Golkar (and TNI) had its roots.
The basic deal was, don’t rock the boat, become complicit in the KKN (Korrupsi, Kollusi dan Nepotisme) and all is sweet. Real opposition only came with the economic crisis in 1997/8 ie there was never a real threat from fundamentalists since the inception of the Orde Bahru (New Order) Suharto regime. The very existence of communist PKI support illustrated a non-secular aspect at odds with the misperception these days of a seething 200 million mass of fundamentalists.
The way things have turned out in Indonesia suggests a level of evolution that perhaps the ME can emulate as viable although somewhat slow in reform. Corruption takes a long time to eliminate. It took Lee Quan Yew 30 years to do so in tiny easily controllable Singapore so westerners who slag off without knowing the history of Indonesia and the exploitative Dutch , and I’m referring to conspicuous indignation Corby type supporters, should tone it down.
Thanks, Peter – fixed.
Thanks, Peter – fixed.
Yes Mark, a reasonable encapsulation of Tariq’s non-interventionist philosophical stance. Apart from the great political goss and jokes he always has, I am chiefly interested in him for this perspective, which is challenging to historians. I’m not sure where I come out in the end, but I do find it a salutary and humble counter-balance to the preponderance of western types (left and right) who sit round tables debating, not whether intervention works, but purely under what conditions they should intervene, as if we are all on the bridge of the starship enterprise, rockets poised on the rest of the world.
Yes Mark, a reasonable encapsulation of Tariq’s non-interventionist philosophical stance. Apart from the great political goss and jokes he always has, I am chiefly interested in him for this perspective, which is challenging to historians. I’m not sure where I come out in the end, but I do find it a salutary and humble counter-balance to the preponderance of western types (left and right) who sit round tables debating, not whether intervention works, but purely under what conditions they should intervene, as if we are all on the bridge of the starship enterprise, rockets poised on the rest of the world.
Hmmm….. “conspicuous indignation” and then guess who appears. Cheers mate.
Hmmm….. “conspicuous indignation” and then guess who appears. Cheers mate.
This ain’t gonna be much of a stoush. Even the neo-cons don’t believe the invasion of Iraq was an intervention to remove a dictator. There are few deluded shills running bedroom blogs but nobody with any actual power or knowledge of the situation even pretends it might have been a scenario.
This ain’t gonna be much of a stoush. Even the neo-cons don’t believe the invasion of Iraq was an intervention to remove a dictator. There are few deluded shills running bedroom blogs but nobody with any actual power or knowledge of the situation even pretends it might have been a scenario.
Well, Ali’s Iraqi ‘organic’ thesis was played out for real when Saddam took over. He ended up slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis during thirty years of endless chaos.
Case closed.
Well, Ali’s Iraqi ‘organic’ thesis was played out for real when Saddam took over. He ended up slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis during thirty years of endless chaos.
Case closed.
Ridiculous testimony CL. Laughed out of court. Case continues.
Ridiculous testimony CL. Laughed out of court. Case continues.
Actually, CS, I thought CL’s point was a slam dunk. Guess I always preferred basketball courts to law courts.
Come to think of it, I was in Melbourne a few weeks back when I came across a dishevel of tea-cosied, barefoot youths with bad skin holding up a rickety trestle table creaking under the weight of unsold socialist merchandise.
Centre stage of this creaking footpath choke was a big pile of Terrific Tariq’s latest tome ‘Endless clattering: The Left’s unrequited bitterness on Bush’. Or something like that. I thought to myself – well, a man can’t take that too seriously, can he?
Case closed.
Actually, CS, I thought CL’s point was a slam dunk. Guess I always preferred basketball courts to law courts.
Come to think of it, I was in Melbourne a few weeks back when I came across a dishevel of tea-cosied, barefoot youths with bad skin holding up a rickety trestle table creaking under the weight of unsold socialist merchandise.
Centre stage of this creaking footpath choke was a big pile of Terrific Tariq’s latest tome ‘Endless clattering: The Left’s unrequited bitterness on Bush’. Or something like that. I thought to myself – well, a man can’t take that too seriously, can he?
Case closed.
Let me see, Al – “guilt by association” fallacy – because some loopy Green Left/ISO trots like Ali, nothing he writes is worth taking seriously. Whatever.
Let me see, Al – “guilt by association” fallacy – because some loopy Green Left/ISO trots like Ali, nothing he writes is worth taking seriously. Whatever.
You been drinking Al?
You been drinking Al?
This definition of ‘criminal’ presupposes the existence of international law. As I am yet to hear of such a thing being adhered-to by any moderately powerful nation, it seems a bit academic.
I’m with George Monbiot on this one. A ‘war of liberation’ would have been worth fighting, were a war of liberation ever to have existed in Iraq in the last hundred years.
This definition of ‘criminal’ presupposes the existence of international law. As I am yet to hear of such a thing being adhered-to by any moderately powerful nation, it seems a bit academic.
I’m with George Monbiot on this one. A ‘war of liberation’ would have been worth fighting, were a war of liberation ever to have existed in Iraq in the last hundred years.
I’d include the kicking out of the British sponsored monarchy in Iraq by Iraqis as something of a war of liberation, Liam. There was significant participation by the Iraqi Communist Party and the Ba’aath Party, before the CIA helped Saddam purge it and take control, also had some runs on the board in terms of things like land reform and anti-imperialism and nationalisation.
I’d include the kicking out of the British sponsored monarchy in Iraq by Iraqis as something of a war of liberation, Liam. There was significant participation by the Iraqi Communist Party and the Ba’aath Party, before the CIA helped Saddam purge it and take control, also had some runs on the board in terms of things like land reform and anti-imperialism and nationalisation.
C.L., what makes Iraq so different from the other places in which tyrants were removed ‘organically’ once external support for them was withdrawn?
Liam, don’t believe the hype re: int’l law as fiction. It exists and is adhered to in most arenas most of the time. There are obvious limits to enforcement, but these would be pretty trivial if the players were more meaningfully democratic, and the people within them actually motivated to see the law adhered to.
C.L., what makes Iraq so different from the other places in which tyrants were removed ‘organically’ once external support for them was withdrawn?
Liam, don’t believe the hype re: int’l law as fiction. It exists and is adhered to in most arenas most of the time. There are obvious limits to enforcement, but these would be pretty trivial if the players were more meaningfully democratic, and the people within them actually motivated to see the law adhered to.
Get briefed CL. The historic first u-turn over Iraq by the US after it rose to the top of the power pile is poignant. To give you substantive reason to pause, take 10 minutes to check this essay out, written well before the War started, by me ol’ mate Phil Knightley.
Get briefed CL. The historic first u-turn over Iraq by the US after it rose to the top of the power pile is poignant. To give you substantive reason to pause, take 10 minutes to check this essay out, written well before the War started, by me ol’ mate Phil Knightley.
Just you worry about the Wendell of Mass Destruction. (We’re sending him down in a sealed train)
Good luck!
Just you worry about the Wendell of Mass Destruction. (We’re sending him down in a sealed train)
Good luck!
C.L., you’re forgetting, as I pointed out above, that Saddam didn’t take over without significant support from the CIA for his purge of the Ba’ath Party. So it wasn’t an organic development at all, but rather a coup aided and abetted by the US.
C.L., you’re forgetting, as I pointed out above, that Saddam didn’t take over without significant support from the CIA for his purge of the Ba’ath Party. So it wasn’t an organic development at all, but rather a coup aided and abetted by the US.
Ps – if we bring Rebecca Wilson into the blogosphere, will that diminish the Vautin like support for a good old stoush?
Ps – if we bring Rebecca Wilson into the blogosphere, will that diminish the Vautin like support for a good old stoush?
That hurt CL. Curse you. Dastardly. You mark my words, I’ll get you for that. We will never forget the ‘del scam of 2005 …
That hurt CL. Curse you. Dastardly. You mark my words, I’ll get you for that. We will never forget the ‘del scam of 2005 …
“dishevel of tea-cosied, barefoot youths with bad skin holding up a rickety trestle table ..”
Currency should have looked more closely. He assumed socialist books, but they were really St Kilda supporters with a pile of sentimental merchandise.
He did admit it was Melbourne.
“dishevel of tea-cosied, barefoot youths with bad skin holding up a rickety trestle table ..”
Currency should have looked more closely. He assumed socialist books, but they were really St Kilda supporters with a pile of sentimental merchandise.
He did admit it was Melbourne.
Kissinger has recently admitted, the Iraq invasion was part of the Great Game (for Oil). Any major military action with falsely represented motivations is always going to cause major death and destruction as confusion on the part of the civilians as to why they are being bombed fatally leads them into futile but bloody resistance.
US warmongering prior to the invasion allowed Hussein to draw the people around him by appeals to patriotism and cultural identity. A very simple ploy and which as Stalin showed can be made to achieve wonders. Hence tens upon tens of thousands of people go to bloody and early graves, despite the PR that Shock & Awe would lead to instant regime collapse.
Iraq is now being held in reserve by the USA, like a trussed up kidnap victim in the cellar.
Kissinger has recently admitted, the Iraq invasion was part of the Great Game (for Oil). Any major military action with falsely represented motivations is always going to cause major death and destruction as confusion on the part of the civilians as to why they are being bombed fatally leads them into futile but bloody resistance.
US warmongering prior to the invasion allowed Hussein to draw the people around him by appeals to patriotism and cultural identity. A very simple ploy and which as Stalin showed can be made to achieve wonders. Hence tens upon tens of thousands of people go to bloody and early graves, despite the PR that Shock & Awe would lead to instant regime collapse.
Iraq is now being held in reserve by the USA, like a trussed up kidnap victim in the cellar.
Hussein nationalised the West-owned Iraq Petroleum Company in June 1972. that would have really given the Septics a hissy-fit. Is this war a payback ‘in their own good time’?
Hussein nationalised the West-owned Iraq Petroleum Company in June 1972. that would have really given the Septics a hissy-fit. Is this war a payback ‘in their own good time’?