In
Iraq, presently, the militant leader Moqtada al-Sadr is being
called upon to lay down arms and join the political process.
But what does negotiation mean if the basic premise of that
negotiation is that the occupying U.S. force in Iraq remains,
and that only the way to work with or adapt to this premise
is being negotiated? The problem of what is being called the
'insurgency' in Iraq is that it is not just a rebellion by
a small group of radical militants who reject U.S. occupation
and intervention. It is an uprising by a small group
of radical militants, however it is a group that represents
a much larger national sentiment
Underlying the 'insurgency'
is the issue of national integrity and self-determination
- that which lies behind the distinctly different terms 'occupation'
and 'liberation'. From the militants' point of view, both
the U.S.- led occupation and the U.S.- supported transitional
government are not 'liberating' Iraq to seek its own definitions,
aims, and forms of government, but rather asking that it conform
to U.S. definitions and aims via a government that is aligned
with these. The issue of humiliation here and of self-respect
is the same issue that faces Muslims in a large part of the
Arab world, namely, the feeling that their own culture and
belief system is being co-opted by a western perspective which
seeks to change and control it so that it becomes something
else. The movement toward national self-defense which is the
sub-current of the insurgency, is a movement whose basic impetus
is the desire for national integrity and an end to foreign
influence - something that U.S. forces, by virtue of their
very presence in Iraq, seem not to understand.
This issue of national integrity
is of major importance - more important, perhaps, than the
specific issue of who controls Iraqi oil. Palestinians, too,
through their radical groups, Hamas and the al-Aqsa brigades,
are also fighting and dying for this issue. In both countries,
there is an attempt to reverse the force of humiliation through
radical militancy - in Palestine, through terrorism and suicide
bombings, in Iraq, through the vociferous opposition of Moqtada
al-Sadr and his followers. Among both peoples there is a deep
need to transform powerlessness into a position of power and
strength. This is not to condone the tactics which are the
cause of so much violence and death, but to understand the
reason for these tactics - the reason for which even young
children in Palestine are willing to fight and die. In Najaf,
supporters of al-Sadr are arriving from all over the country
to support the Mehdi cause and an end to American occupation.
Not everyone feels threatened
by foreign occupation. Some feel they are benefitting from
it. Some are not so fiercely nationalistic. But for those
who feel that their very lifeblood is being threatened, it
is a cause worth dying for, a cause worth living for as well
if the basic premise were understood - the need for real self-determination
in Iraq and an end to foreign intervention. Those who are
most fiercely aligned with this goal are not crazy. They are
angry and they are humiliated.
If negotiations were truly to
be open, they would have to lay on the table for discussion,
the possibility of the end of the American occupation, not
in two years or five years, as some retired generals are now
suggesting would be needed to 'stabilize' the country, but
now.
A 'fight to the finish' in Najaf
would be a terrible thing, not only in terms of the direct
and immediate loss of life on both sides, but also in terms
of the symbolism of strength-in-resistance creating heros
among those who fight the Americans. This is a banner that
has already been taken up in much of the Arab world, and it
would be increasingly a banner that would draw to itself much
of Islam should grave destruction to the Iman Ali shrine take
place.
America needs to recognize the
effects of its use of power upon a world that feels its hand
keenly and that needs to seek independence from this hand.
Can we not, with greater humility, find the way toward meeting
this world on its own cultural terms, in its own language,
instead of converting it into what we think it should be?
