|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Iraq Study Group: a bipartisan coverup of Washingtons
war crimes
By Bill Van Auken
9 December 2006
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
A striking feature of the Iraq Study Group report is that its
belated admission of the military-political debacle and catastrophic
conditions created by the US intervention in Iraq excludes any
assessment of how the grave and deteriorating situation
in that country came to pass, and who bears political responsibility
for it.
Instead, the document includes multiple denunciations of the
Iraqi government for failing to provide essential services, create
a functioning judiciary or foster economic progress. That the
country was laid to waste by a US war and remains under military
occupationmaking Washington fully responsible for all of
these failuresis simply passed over in silence.
As one member of the group, Democratic power broker Vernon
Jordan, put it, the bipartisan panel made no effort to determine
how the house got on fire.
The American people, to whom the Iraq Study Groups report
is ostensibly addressed, are more than entitled to ask the question,
Why not? They have, moreover, every right to suspect
that the panel is silent on the identities of those responsible
for the torching of Iraq because it is the work of a criminal
gang of arsonists who control the US government.
Under the cover of proposing a course change in US policy in
Iraq, the panel offers a blanket amnesty for those who conspired
to launch an illegal war that has resulted in the destruction
of an entire society and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of
Iraqis, as well as nearly 3,000 US troops.
This crime continues to widen every day. The Iraq Study Group
document contains a section entitled Sources of Violence.
It says the following:
Violence is increasing in scope, complexity, and lethality.
There are multiple sources of violence in Iraq: the Sunni Arab
insurgency, al Qaeda and affiliated jihadist groups, Shiite militias
and death squads, and organized criminality. Sectarian violenceparticularly
in and around Baghdadhas become the principal challenge
to stability.
Yet it fails to state the obvious. The root cause of this violence
is an imperialist intervention that was aimed at reducing Iraq
to a semi-colony of the US. It was this intervention that generated
the so-called insurgencyi.e., the legitimate
resistance of Iraqis to the foreign military occupation of their
country. And it was Washingtons attempts to impose a client
regime, utilizing tactics of divide-and-rule, that gave rise to
the nightmare of sectarian violence.
The closest that the report comes to acknowledging US responsibility
is contained in the following passage: Because events in
Iraq have been set in motion by American decisions and actions,
the United States has both a national and a moral interest in
doing what it can to give Iraqis an opportunity to avert anarchy.
How delicately phrased! The formulation suggests that the US
government is somehow only indirectly responsible, its well-intentioned
decisions and actions having created unforeseeable
ill effectsnot that those in power today in Washington are
both politically and criminally liable for an Iraqi death toll
that has been credibly estimated at over 655,000.
Nor is this merely a matter of a crime carried out three-and-a-half
years ago which triggered violence by others. The US occupation
force of nearly 150,000 soldiers and Marines remains a principal
source of lethal violence against the Iraqi people.
This was tragically confirmed once again on Friday, when US
warplanes bombed two homes in the town of al-Ishaqi, northwest
of Baghdad, killing at least 32 civilians. The towns mayor
said that of the 25 bodies that had been pulled out of the rubble
so far, eight were women and six children.
The US military labeled the victims Al Qaeda terrorists,
the standard designation given to civilians slaughtered by the
American military machine.
The Iraq war was not a mistaken policy that can be set right
by adopting the Iraq Study Groups 79-point plan. It was
a premeditated crime for which no one has yet been held accountable.
The patent aim of the panels proposals is to continue
this crime and, under the mantle of bipartisanship, pursue the
original objectives of the warconquering a country with
the worlds second-largest oil reserves as part of a strategy
of using US military superiority to establish the global hegemony
of American capitalism.
In presenting the report, the panels Republican chairman,
James Baker, dismissed any idea that it represented a call for
an end to the US intervention. This report does not in any
way call for a graceful exit, Baker declared. In fact,
we specifically say we agree with the presidents articulated
goal.
Baker added, The report also makes clear: Were
going to have a really robust American troop presence in Iraq
and the region for a very long time.
Democrats promote consensus for
war
Democrats on the panel stressed their commitment to forging
a bipartisan consensus for continuing the war and suppressing
the mass popular opposition to the Iraq intervention that found
expression in the defeat delivered to the Republicans in last
months election.
The panels Democratic co-chairman, Lee Hamilton, declared
his hope that our report will help bridge the divide in
this country on the Iraq war and will at least be a beginning
of a consensus here, because without that consensus in the country,
we do not think ultimately you can succeed in Iraq.
Leon Panetta, White House chief of staff in the Democratic
Clinton administration, was even more explicit. This country
cannot be at war and be as divided as we are today, he declared,
adding that the report represented one last chance at making
Iraq work and one last chance at unifying this country
on this war.
What none of these political eminences bothered to explain
is why the American people should unite behind a military
adventure that is characterized by rampant criminality.
In launching its invasion of Iraq in March of 2003, the Bush
administration carried out the same principal crime for which
the surviving leaders of Hitlers Third Reich were tried,
convicted and hung at Nurembergthat of waging aggressive
war.
The international military tribunal that tried the Nazi officials
described waging such a war as the supreme international
crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains
within itself the accumulated evil of the whole. It is this
accumulated evil that is now unfolding daily in the
streets of Baghdad and elsewhere in Iraq, in the form of bombings,
death squad murders, torture and other crimes against humanity.
For the Bush administration, waging a war of aggression was
not an impulsive action, but rather a deliberate policy formulated
well in advance. In a speech delivered to the graduating class
at the US Military Academy at West Point in June 2002, Bush publicly
announced a new national security doctrine that jettisoned the
previous policies of containment and deterrence in favor of unprovoked
military action against any purported threats to US security and
interests.
The war was then foisted upon the American people with lies
about imminent threats from non-existent weapons of mass destruction
and fabricated ties between Baghdad and Islamist terrorists.
America is a country with over 2 million of its citizens incarcerated,
the bulk of them for non-violent offenses. Zero-tolerance
enforcement and three strikes and youre out
penalty schemes have filled the countrys prisonsoverwhelmingly
with people drawn from the most oppressed and impoverished layers
of society.
Yet for those in the Bush White House and the Pentagon who
have carried out this supreme international crime,
there is neither accountability nor punishment.
The Iraq Study Group could not touch the question of accountability,
because both major parties and all the major political institutions
in America, including the mass media, were complicit in carrying
out or abetting an act of military aggression that constitutes
a war crime.
Significantly, among those listed as having been consulted
by the panel are the columnists Thomas Friedman of the New
York Times and George Will of the Washington Post,
two of the most prominentamong so manyof the media
voices that not only echoed the lies of the Bush administration,
but enthusiastically campaigned for a war against Iraq.
Friedman already had a long and loathsome record of justifying
imperialist militarism as a necessary condition for corporate
profits. Two and a half years before the Iraq invasion, he wrote,
The hidden hand of the market will never work without a
hidden fistMcDonalds cannot flourish without McDonnell
Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps
the world safe for Silicon Valleys technologies is called
the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps . . .
Without America on duty, there will be no America Online.
In September 2003, as evidence mounted that the claims about
weapons of mass destruction were all lies, the Times columnist
proclaimed blithely, The war to oust Saddam Hussein was
always a war of choice (a good choice, I believe). But democracies
dont like to fight wars of choice . . .
And it was Will who stated in 2004, as the death toll in Iraq
mounted, Regime change, occupation, nation-buildingin
a word, empireare a bloody business. Now Americans must
steel themselves for administering the violence necessary . .
.
In the final analysis, the Iraq Study Group report only underscores
the unbridgeable gulf that separates the entire US ruling establishment,
its two political parties and its media spokesmen from the millions
of American working people, the overwhelming majority of the US
population, who oppose the Iraq war and want American troops withdrawn
now.
It is necessary not only to halt this war, but also to ensure
that all those who conspired to carry it out be held politically
and criminally responsible. Trying the likes of Bush, Cheney,
Rumsfeld and others for war crimes is necessary both to achieve
a real accounting for the bloody and tragic debacle in Iraq and
to prevent the launching of further and even more catastrophic
wars of aggression.
See Also:
Bush rejects Iraq Study Group report
[8 December 2006]
Iraq Study Group report highlights crisis
of US imperialism in Iraq and at home
[7 December 2006]
Senate committee votes unanimously to
confirm Bush nominee for Pentagon chief
[6 December 2006]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |