Wednesday, May 11, 2005

Resistance to the occupation

With some help (well, a lot actually) I've figured it out.

The 'resistance' in Iraq is not trying to oust the US forces. It is doing everything it can to make them stay.

Let me explain.

It is terrorism in one of its purest form. Throughout history people have used provocation of a stronger opponent as a tool. Vietnam is one of the best examples of this. The North-Vietnamese and the VC managed to provoke the US forces into the use of disproportionate force, thereby often killing and wounding people that up until then had been friends or even allies of the US.

The 'Palestinians' use the same tactics. Murder a few Jews, and hope the IDF strikes back in such a way that more Arabs get involved one way or another, building momentum for the terrorists' cause.

What do the terrorists operating in Iraq have to gain by tying down the Americans?

Well, everything, really. If the US left now, Shia Muslims would be in control, and there would be no democracy. Shia's would receive all the suport in the world from Iran. Worst case scenario for the Sunni Muslim terrorists.
If the US stays and democracy breaks out in Iraq, Shia Muslims would again be in control. They are by far the majority in Iraq, and Sunni's would loose the control they've had since before Saddam was boss. They could still terrorize the country, but it would then become an internal strife (which it is now in all but name, they're murdering other Iraqi's in much greater numbers than they are Americans), which they could never win.

By tying down the US, the terrorists can make it appear as though they are still fighting the Americans, and obscure the fact that what they're actually resisting is something only a psychopath or a religious fanatic loaths: Democracy. But the Americans have learned a lesson or two. They are operating much more surgically than ever before, and making more friends than enemies. The tactic of provoking the US into blanket strikes is not working, but the terrorists have nothing to lose by persisting. The very least they are achieving is instability, and the chance that perhaps Iraqi forces overreact and estrange (parts of) the general population by retaliating indiscriminately.

Like I said, I had some help in figuring this out. Help from an Arab:
MEMRI translated this article, and the Washington bureau chief of the London Arabic-language daily Al-Hayat, Salama Na'mat exposes the truth:
When the Saddamist terrorism in Iraq targets the elected, the security forces, the army, and the [Iraqi] National Guard, its aim is to prolong the [U.S.] occupation by thwarting the process of building national, political, security, and military institutions that can protect the country and ensure its stability. The terrorists and their supporters in the region and worldwide know that the Iraqi government cannot demand that the foreign forces leave before it can handle the security situation - and that is precisely what they are trying to thwart.
Al-Zarqawi and his "brave freedom fighters" must be killed. There's no other solution. They will not stop waging war, just as the 'Palestinians' will not stop, so long as most - if not all - Arab countries support and finance their wars. Iraq can be the first Arabic country to join the democratic world, and start a trend. But as long as dozens of people are murdered weekly, destabilizing the fledgling society, there's no chance of that.

So far, it seems, the terrorists are maintaining the status quo. But the US forces may capture the key leaders, and who knows what happens then.

These are interesting times alright.


Post a Comment

<< Home