This is Me Talking to Myself
On the third anniversary of the war in Iraq, it's time for me to revisit my support for it.
Since my senior year of highschool, I was one of the most ardent supporter of the war to oust Saddam Hussein. Like everyone else, both supporters and opponents, I was convinced by the Bush administration that weapons of mass destruction were a looming threat. While my specific rationale for the war focused on WMD, I also pointed to how fragmented and inconsistent the arguments of the opponents of the war were. My own particular point was that Saddam Hussein had defied 17 UN Security Council resolutions; by doing so, Saddam threatened the purpose and concept of the international community. One could see back then the unmistakable parallels between the UN of today and the League of Nations of before World War II. The Coalition of the Willing was the product of a broken international institution. The UN was irrelevant back then, and if the Security Council fails to act against Iran, it will remain so.
Beyond the WMD and Saddam Hussein's defiance of the international community, something else about the war with Iraq sustained me. It was an idea, and it intoxicated me. It was radical, revolutionary, and visionary. Before the run up to the war, the most troubling questions I had about the war on terror were about the root cause of terrorism. What causes a man to fly a plane into a building? What motivates a man to attack a country on the other side of the Earth? Like many other people, I was convinced by 9/11 that the terrorists were evil and were motivated by nothing other than hatred for our way of life. I construed it as a reaction to modernity. I don't believe that men like Abu Musab al Zarqawi or Mohammed Atta dream of returning to the Middle Ages. Zarqawi, Atta, and other young Arab men like them dream of a future where muslims are no longer humiliated by poverty or oppression, and a future where muslims are prosperous. Men like Zarqawi and Atta must find a scapegoat to explain the bleakness and malaise in the their world. Men like Zarqawi and Atta blame Israel and the West for their oppression; after all, it's everyone's fault but their own. Young Arab men are not exploited by the West, or even Israel for that matter; young Arab men live bleak, bland lives because of their governments. Their governments offer no political freedoms to vent anger and offer no jobs to utilize talent. Men like Zarqawi and Atta could have been corporate executives, politicians, doctors, lawyers, or scientists. Instead they chose jihad. Jihad is the only way they can liberate themselves from the bleakness and malaise of their societies; it provides adventure and purpose. Imagine Fight Club on steroids.
Hence the value of liberal reform. But could Arabs overthrow their repressive governments? The answer is no; at any rate, not for a long time. Instead of fighting their governments, which they can't beat, terrorists fight democracies, which they feel are weak. Terrorists feel that heroism against their bogeymen can inspire their countries to unite and to usher in a new caliphate. Many of us felt that we couldn't wait for internal reform in the Arab world. Freedom has to be fought for, and it has to be won at the tip of the bayonet. Iraq, with its relative wealth and educated population, was thought to be the best place to sustain democracy, especially after its population lived through the horrors of Saddam's dictatorship. But, we never knew the Shia and Sunnis hated each other so much - did we? If Iraq could do it, then others could be inspired, and maybe then young Arab men would not have to blow themselves up. Maybe then they could have the dignity and prosperity they want. Against that idea, the arguments or the Left and the paleoconservatives felt callous and morally bankrupt.
It was tragically idealistic. I believed that democracy could be exported and the world could be made a better place. If you could sum up the reason why I enlisted in the Army with one word, it would have to be Iraq. The liberation of Iraq was my dream, and the exit from my own world of bleakness and malaise. But now, that dream is jeopardized by crushing reality.
On the third anniversary of the Iraq War, that dream is in peril. The editors at the New York Times are painting a bleak picture for the future. Just go to their website. Their statistics about Iraq look like hell and they say that civil war is imminent in that country. And while the country by and large agrees with the New York Times' assessment, the prowar intellectuals remain silent. Friedman, Hitchens, Krauthammer, Wolfowitz, and Fukuyama... these are the men who have abandoned the idea - Fukuyama especially. That angers me. While I volunteered to fight in Iraq, these intellectuals ran away from that visionary idea. (Worst yet, the Army sent me to Afghanistan.) I guess this explains why the writers that comprised the Lost Generation, and T.E. Lawrence in particular, are my favorites. They mirror my jaded disgust with the world and articulate how the dreams of young men are broken by older men.
But, I am now sustained by one fact that everyone can agree on. The choice between democracy or destruction in Iraq is up to the Iraqis alone. While the media exaggerates the imminence of civil war in Iraq, its leaders are urging calm and unity. They are doing the best they can. There are more Iraqis vested in democracy than I think we give them credit for. In this time of crisis, I'll have to believe in Iraqi patriots.
Since my senior year of highschool, I was one of the most ardent supporter of the war to oust Saddam Hussein. Like everyone else, both supporters and opponents, I was convinced by the Bush administration that weapons of mass destruction were a looming threat. While my specific rationale for the war focused on WMD, I also pointed to how fragmented and inconsistent the arguments of the opponents of the war were. My own particular point was that Saddam Hussein had defied 17 UN Security Council resolutions; by doing so, Saddam threatened the purpose and concept of the international community. One could see back then the unmistakable parallels between the UN of today and the League of Nations of before World War II. The Coalition of the Willing was the product of a broken international institution. The UN was irrelevant back then, and if the Security Council fails to act against Iran, it will remain so.
Beyond the WMD and Saddam Hussein's defiance of the international community, something else about the war with Iraq sustained me. It was an idea, and it intoxicated me. It was radical, revolutionary, and visionary. Before the run up to the war, the most troubling questions I had about the war on terror were about the root cause of terrorism. What causes a man to fly a plane into a building? What motivates a man to attack a country on the other side of the Earth? Like many other people, I was convinced by 9/11 that the terrorists were evil and were motivated by nothing other than hatred for our way of life. I construed it as a reaction to modernity. I don't believe that men like Abu Musab al Zarqawi or Mohammed Atta dream of returning to the Middle Ages. Zarqawi, Atta, and other young Arab men like them dream of a future where muslims are no longer humiliated by poverty or oppression, and a future where muslims are prosperous. Men like Zarqawi and Atta must find a scapegoat to explain the bleakness and malaise in the their world. Men like Zarqawi and Atta blame Israel and the West for their oppression; after all, it's everyone's fault but their own. Young Arab men are not exploited by the West, or even Israel for that matter; young Arab men live bleak, bland lives because of their governments. Their governments offer no political freedoms to vent anger and offer no jobs to utilize talent. Men like Zarqawi and Atta could have been corporate executives, politicians, doctors, lawyers, or scientists. Instead they chose jihad. Jihad is the only way they can liberate themselves from the bleakness and malaise of their societies; it provides adventure and purpose. Imagine Fight Club on steroids.
Hence the value of liberal reform. But could Arabs overthrow their repressive governments? The answer is no; at any rate, not for a long time. Instead of fighting their governments, which they can't beat, terrorists fight democracies, which they feel are weak. Terrorists feel that heroism against their bogeymen can inspire their countries to unite and to usher in a new caliphate. Many of us felt that we couldn't wait for internal reform in the Arab world. Freedom has to be fought for, and it has to be won at the tip of the bayonet. Iraq, with its relative wealth and educated population, was thought to be the best place to sustain democracy, especially after its population lived through the horrors of Saddam's dictatorship. But, we never knew the Shia and Sunnis hated each other so much - did we? If Iraq could do it, then others could be inspired, and maybe then young Arab men would not have to blow themselves up. Maybe then they could have the dignity and prosperity they want. Against that idea, the arguments or the Left and the paleoconservatives felt callous and morally bankrupt.
It was tragically idealistic. I believed that democracy could be exported and the world could be made a better place. If you could sum up the reason why I enlisted in the Army with one word, it would have to be Iraq. The liberation of Iraq was my dream, and the exit from my own world of bleakness and malaise. But now, that dream is jeopardized by crushing reality.
On the third anniversary of the Iraq War, that dream is in peril. The editors at the New York Times are painting a bleak picture for the future. Just go to their website. Their statistics about Iraq look like hell and they say that civil war is imminent in that country. And while the country by and large agrees with the New York Times' assessment, the prowar intellectuals remain silent. Friedman, Hitchens, Krauthammer, Wolfowitz, and Fukuyama... these are the men who have abandoned the idea - Fukuyama especially. That angers me. While I volunteered to fight in Iraq, these intellectuals ran away from that visionary idea. (Worst yet, the Army sent me to Afghanistan.) I guess this explains why the writers that comprised the Lost Generation, and T.E. Lawrence in particular, are my favorites. They mirror my jaded disgust with the world and articulate how the dreams of young men are broken by older men.
But, I am now sustained by one fact that everyone can agree on. The choice between democracy or destruction in Iraq is up to the Iraqis alone. While the media exaggerates the imminence of civil war in Iraq, its leaders are urging calm and unity. They are doing the best they can. There are more Iraqis vested in democracy than I think we give them credit for. In this time of crisis, I'll have to believe in Iraqi patriots.