Hot on HuffPost:

See More Stories

Libya and Iraq: Two Ways of Opposing a Tyrant -- but One Stole the Nation's Pride

2 years ago
  0 Comments Say Something  »
Text Size
The historic anti-authoritarian, pro-democratic uprisings that have swept across North Africa raise an intriguing and troubling question: Absent American intervention, could a similar movement have unseated Iraq's Saddam Hussein?

Communism came to Eastern Europe in the kit bag of the Red Army, according to the old glib-but-accurate gibe. This is essentially how the U.S. military installed democracy in Iraq.

It didn't have to be that way. In the wake of Operation Desert Storm in 1991, which pushed the Iraqi army out of Kuwait, U.S. policy-makers urged Iraq's Shia and Kurds to rise up against the reeling regime. Then, when they did, American forces left them to be crushed by the dictator's untender mercies (just as the Dulles brothers did with Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956). Under George W. Bush, neo-cons insisted that the oppressed and demoralized Iraqi people would never again summon the wherewithal to overthrow Hussein on their own, so the U.S. had to invade.

However, events in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia challenge that assumption. True, Iraq's Sunni-dominated army was in no way a potentially neutral (and decisive) third force, as it was in Tunisia and Egypt. At the time, political observers saw just one alternative to invasion for deposing Hussein: a bloody, U.S.-instigated military coup. Without the invasion, Bush administration strategists might now argue, the regime could have lasted another decade, and made untold mischief in the region. But what if they were wrong?

What has been sacrificed in the intervening years? For us, thousands of American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. On the Iraqi side, hundreds of thousands of lives -- many, if not most, civilians -- and untold damage to infrastructure. But in the process, something more enduring was also taken from the Iraqi people: their history, and not just the antiquities looted from the National Museum in the wake of the invasion.

Unlike other nations in Europe, the Americas, Africa and Asia that cherish their revolutionary and anti-colonial origins, Iraqis will always know that their freedom was handed to them by a foreign power. Even the war's greatest photo op -- pulling down Saddam's statue in a Baghdad square -- was accomplished with a U.S. military vehicle.

In Libya, Western military intervention may yet prove crucial -- it's no coincidence the U.S. Marine anthem includes the phrase, "to the shores of Tripoli," recalling another action. But if it does there will be little question that the bulk of the credit should go to the Libyan people who mounted the insurrection, doing their own fighting and dying in the face of daunting odds.

As Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee Tuesday, "We are also very conscious of the desire by the Libyan opposition forces that they be seen as doing this by themselves on behalf of the Libyan people, that there not be outside intervention by any external force. Because they want this to have been their accomplishment. We respect that."

Even Iraq's foreign minister, Hoshiyar Zebari, acknowledged the lesson in his opening remarks to the Arab League in Cairo on Wednesday, saying all of the region's governments "desire for no foreign intervention" in Libya.

"We hope the Libyan people can overcome these difficult conditions, and that the Libyan leaders take brave stands to stop bloodshed and respect the legitimate desires and rights of its people to live in a free, democratic nation," Zebari said, according to a Reuters report.

Even if, in the end, Western military intervention does prove critical to victory, it will fall into the category of support, much like the French, Polish and Irish assistance provided to the 18th century American revolutionaries. American conservatives don't like to admit it, but the French fleet ensured the colonists' final triumph at Yorktown.

In Afghanistan, the national narrative was already established long before U.S. troops arrived. The country has defeated foreign invaders and occupiers for centuries, up to and including the Red Army of the Soviet Union. In all likelihood, they will simply wait out the Americans and the client regime in Kabul, and go back to telling their country's glorious story in classrooms and around campfires.

All that has been taken from the Iraqis -- forever.

Our New Approach to Comments

In an effort to encourage the same level of civil dialogue among Politics Daily’s readers that we expect of our writers – a “civilogue,” to use the term coined by PD’s Jeffrey Weiss – we are requiring commenters to use their AOL or AIM screen names to submit a comment, and we are reading all comments before publishing them. Personal attacks (on writers, other readers, Nancy Pelosi, George W. Bush, or anyone at all) and comments that are not productive additions to the conversation will not be published, period, to make room for a discussion among those with ideas to kick around. Please read our Help and Feedback section for more info.

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum Comment Moderation Enabled. Your comment will appear after it is cleared by an editor.

9 Comments

Filter by:
Wade

We need to bring all of our troops home, drill for the oil under our feet, heal and refurbish our military forces and install a few thousand on the Mexican border with orders of shoot to kill. Abolish the IRS, the ATF, the DHS, the DOE and any other wasteful unnecessary/worthless government created money pit. Round up the illegals and put them to work building an electrified border fence, then leave them on the Mexican side of the completed fence. This scenario would bring us back to strength in the world, create jobs, and eliminate some of the criminal activities of our so called government. Throw all the present politicians out and replace them with citizen representatives and a native born president who are willing to follow our Constitution as law.

March 07 2011 at 11:42 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Ron Ponton

Long live Democracy

March 06 2011 at 12:46 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
greatqb44

But in the process, something more enduring was also taken from the Iraqi people: their history, and not just the antiquities looted from the National Museum in the wake of the invasion.

Huge lie that has been busted over and over but im sure he doesnt wanna know this as it doesnt fit his myopic view and of coure he doesnt seem to care bout egypt's goodies that were stolen..once again not in his myopic view

March 06 2011 at 12:37 PM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
snoel1943

It is human nature to have a 'fight or flight" reaction to danger. Those that flee must remember that they cannot impose their beliefs, laws and culture on those countries they flee to. They gave up that right. Those that stay and fight for their beliefs, face the danger and hardships in their own backyards are entitled to the rights of their culture, laws they make and freedom. Once the refugees have settled the safety of their loved ones, they might think about going back and making a difference in their own country. Just saying.

March 06 2011 at 9:27 AM Report abuse +5 rate up rate down Reply
consindenial

Joe, Bush went to war in Iraq upon the lie of WMD. All intelligence from around the world had debunked this excuse. When a congressman exposed this, the Bush administration exposed the congressman's wife as a covert CIA operative. In the immortal words of "his wife is fair game". Their retribution should have been treated as treason.

March 06 2011 at 8:54 AM Report abuse -2 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to consindenial's comment
priority109

THEN why didn't the UN chane their tune on iraQ ? missing wmd's....resolutions and sanctions etc.

March 06 2011 at 11:59 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
joe

Saddham may have been overthown so it was not necessary for Bush to invade Iraq? But military intervention in Libya may prove crucial? What's the difference? George Bush invaded Iraq and Obama would be the one to intervene in Libya So the article seems to be setting up a defense for Obama so that he won't be accused of going to war for oil or all the other accusations hurled at Bush. How about the real possibility that it was actually the new freedoms of the Iraqi people that was the spark that ingnited the protests in the middle east? Both the Iraqi and the Libyan peoples were being murdered by their leaders and both countries are oil suppliers so the similarities are there and Obama is going to take some heat if he intervenes in Libya. That's the price that has to be paid for the undeserved attacks on Bush and much of it came from the Democrats in the House and Senate.Obama included.

March 06 2011 at 12:15 AM Report abuse +3 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to joe's comment
lo colon

Joe, you miss the point of the article, that is regime change that results in legitimate change must come from the people not imposed by an outside power. That's the impetus that hopefully results in democracy. Remember do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Would you, who obviously didn't vote for Obama, want a foreign power to depose Obama? As for Mr. Bush, Colin Powell, as his Secretary of State, warned in the push to invade Iraq, that if he broke it, he bought it. Guess what, we're still paying for it.

March 07 2011 at 9:25 AM Report abuse +1 rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to lo colon's comment
joe

If Obama was murdering the people opposed to him I certainly would welcome Obama being deposed by a foreign power. My point is partially that the Iraq war and the freedom of the Iraqi people could be the spark that started the push by the people to to depose their theocratic governments or their dictators. Iraq may be the model for Democracy in the Middle East. That would be a very desirable result and History would be very kind to Bush whom I doubt that you voted for. By the way I am no fan of Colin Powell either.

March 07 2011 at 6:29 PM Report abuse rate up rate down

Follow Politics Daily

  • Comics
robert-and-donna-trussell
CHAOS THEORY
Featuring political comics by Robert and Donna TrussellMore>>
  • Woman UP Video
politics daily videos
Weekly Videos
Woman Up, Politics Daily's Online Sunday ShowMore»
politics daily videos
TV Appearances
Showcasing appearances by Politics Daily staff and contributors.More>>