Iraq's electoral fiasco
by Mike Whitney
[font=arial,sans-serif]Link to Article[/font]
[font=arial,sans-serif]The only way the Iraqi elections would have been interesting is if they'd stuck Saddam's name on the ballot. Then we could've seen whether the Iraqi people are sick enough of Bush's farce to want a return to the old order. Instead, we're left ferreting through reams of trivia to sort out what the voting really meant.
It's easier to figure out what it doesn't mean.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=8 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 bgColor=#eeeeee><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- BEGIN BURST! CODE --><!-- /* Copyright 1997-2003 BURST! Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. (Version 1.0F) */ --><!-- END BURST! CODE --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>It doesn't mean that the water that has been off for 8 straight days in Baghdad will come on anytime soon. Nor does it mean that the sputtering electrical grid will work for more than 4 hours a day, or that anyone is going to clean up the raw sewage that's coursing through the streets in downtown Baghdad. And it certainly doesn't mean that the newly "elected" officials will have any real influence over borders, air space, oil extraction, economic policy, deployment of troops or any of the other powers we normally associate with sovereign leaders. (Even the ridiculously named Iraqi National Bank is completely owned by foreign investors) Those will still be in the hands of their US overlords. They will however, be frequently photographed by an enthusiastic media eager to display America's latest satraps to the world. And, they can also expect an engraved invitation to the upcoming State of the Union Speech, where they'll be showcased next to Crawford Laura in the front-row, upper-deck, like some exotic Amazonian bird captured in the wild. (The Bush people are very big on diversity.)
So, although the elections may be a meaningless exercise of imperial maneuvering, the coup was carried off with considerable skill.
For one thing, the western media proved, once again, its breathtaking range and ability. All the major televised media featured virtually the same lead without one dissonant voice. They praised the "brave Iraqis who put themselves at risk to enjoy the blessings of democracy". This "objective" account was accompanied by footage of mile-long lines of expectant Iraqis waiting to cast their first vote in free elections. No mention was made of the fact that (as Robert Fisk noted) that the world media was limited to exactly 5 polling stations that were secured by legions of troops and armored vehicles in predominantly Shiite areas to give the impression of widespread participation.
In keeping with the (Karl) Rovian philosophy of political hi-jinks, the streets were swept-clean, the cement barricades were hidden from view, and the rolls of razor-wire were scrupulously kept off camera. All signs of city under siege were effectively concealed. It was a solid effort on the part of the White House producers who slapped this comedy together. Particularly admirable were the scenes of enraptured Iraqis waving flags and gyrating with abandon on the streets of Baghdad. What American could watch such a heartwarming demonstration of elation and not feel choked-up by the great gift Bush has bestowed on these simple people.
Alas, it was all a hoax as well. As Robert Fisk opines in his latest article in the UK Independent, he stumbled on "three truckloads of youths, all brandishing Iraqi flags-like the unemployed who have been sticking posters to Baghdad's walls-paid by the government to 'advertise' the election. And there was a cameraman from state television."
"Paid by the government"?
Ah-ha! Yet another public relations ploy like the carefully choreographed toppling of Saddam in Fidros Square, or the staged landing of "Top-Gun" Georgie B. on the USS Lincoln; this time arranged and financed by ex-CIA operative (and former Saddam agent) Iyad Allawi.
Shame, shame, shame!...but, good theatre none the less. And, besides, the charges of fraud won't be forthcoming anytime soon. For now, the balloting is being celebrated by the media as another positive step towards the anticipated "transfer of power". Just listen to the unanimity of the approbation from the press: "Iraqis Brave Bombs to vote in Millions" MSNBC... "This is Democracy!" Reuters... "Brave Voters defy Rebels" NY Post... "Iraqis begin Historic Vote" Washington Times.
Anyway, you get the idea. A quick perusing of Google headlines produces 1,468 stories with nearly identical bylines. The western press is either besotted with Iraq's "alleged" metamorphosis or they're getting their marching orders from "Sec-Def" at the Pentagon. Either way, don't waste your time looking for divergent points of view in the establishment media. Anything that fails to harmonize with the Conquistador agenda has been conscientiously extracted by the roots.
NYT's profound remorse for the deceased
The "Paper of Record" gave its typically glib assessment of the elections by noting "a comparatively peaceful day of voting". In the parlance of the New York Times that means that only 41 Iraqis will killed; "chump-change" for America's prodigious war-machine, unless, of course, you happen to be the unhappy wife or child who just lost your father or brother to a nervous Marine with a hair-trigger finger. In any event that's not the business of the NYTs. They've got a war to cover and (like Tommy Franks says) they don't do body counts.
Similarly, Corporate George added his voice to the chorus of praise with his characteristic chest-thumping, "I-told-you-so" rhetoric saying "The people of Iraq have spoken to the world, and the world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East....Terrorists and insurgents will continue to wage their war against democracy, but we will support the Iraqi people in their fight against them." And, Blah, blah, blah; like the shallow whistling of hot air emerging from a flat tire.
George W. may be crowing "victory" a bit prematurely. Iraq is not quite ready for the trophy-case along side Bush's Warlord-dominated, drug-colony, Afghanistan. And, despite the celebratory braying from the obsequious press, 20% of the population boycotted the elections, and that 20% (Sunnis) have ruled Iraq as long as anyone can remember. They'll have their say before the day is done.
Bush can revel in his Pyrrhic victory; everyone enjoys seeing happy, ballot-clutching folks mugging for the cameras. But, beyond the circumscribed range of the media, the fighting rages on.
Attacks on the polls occurred in Baghdad, Balad, Basra, Baquba, Hilla, Kirkuk, Mosul, Tal Afar, Al-Duluiya, Al-Mhawil, Al Muqtadiya and Samarra. This is the tragic litany of the Torturer-in-Chief's ongoing depredations in Iraq; a list that will be faithfully excluded from today's festive coverage of election results. Reality rarely intrudes into the bubble of managed perceptions that encloses the American public. Today will be no different.
The suffering, torture and death unleashed by America's blundering military campaign have been temporarily suspended to rejoice in this moment of unalloyed, Orwellian ecstasy. Bush has acquired his fig leaf of legitimacy and the rudiments of a client regime that will assist him in his long-range goals, but at what cost to both Iraq's future and America's prestige. The desperation of this electoral fiasco is reminiscent of a skydiver grasping at a frayed ripcord as he tumbles downward through the ether.
There's a hard landing ahead. [/font]
by Mike Whitney
[font=arial,sans-serif]Link to Article[/font]
[font=arial,sans-serif]The only way the Iraqi elections would have been interesting is if they'd stuck Saddam's name on the ballot. Then we could've seen whether the Iraqi people are sick enough of Bush's farce to want a return to the old order. Instead, we're left ferreting through reams of trivia to sort out what the voting really meant.
It's easier to figure out what it doesn't mean.
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=8 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=2 bgColor=#eeeeee><TBODY><TR><TD><!-- BEGIN BURST! CODE --><!-- /* Copyright 1997-2003 BURST! Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. (Version 1.0F) */ --><!-- END BURST! CODE --></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>It doesn't mean that the water that has been off for 8 straight days in Baghdad will come on anytime soon. Nor does it mean that the sputtering electrical grid will work for more than 4 hours a day, or that anyone is going to clean up the raw sewage that's coursing through the streets in downtown Baghdad. And it certainly doesn't mean that the newly "elected" officials will have any real influence over borders, air space, oil extraction, economic policy, deployment of troops or any of the other powers we normally associate with sovereign leaders. (Even the ridiculously named Iraqi National Bank is completely owned by foreign investors) Those will still be in the hands of their US overlords. They will however, be frequently photographed by an enthusiastic media eager to display America's latest satraps to the world. And, they can also expect an engraved invitation to the upcoming State of the Union Speech, where they'll be showcased next to Crawford Laura in the front-row, upper-deck, like some exotic Amazonian bird captured in the wild. (The Bush people are very big on diversity.)
So, although the elections may be a meaningless exercise of imperial maneuvering, the coup was carried off with considerable skill.
For one thing, the western media proved, once again, its breathtaking range and ability. All the major televised media featured virtually the same lead without one dissonant voice. They praised the "brave Iraqis who put themselves at risk to enjoy the blessings of democracy". This "objective" account was accompanied by footage of mile-long lines of expectant Iraqis waiting to cast their first vote in free elections. No mention was made of the fact that (as Robert Fisk noted) that the world media was limited to exactly 5 polling stations that were secured by legions of troops and armored vehicles in predominantly Shiite areas to give the impression of widespread participation.
In keeping with the (Karl) Rovian philosophy of political hi-jinks, the streets were swept-clean, the cement barricades were hidden from view, and the rolls of razor-wire were scrupulously kept off camera. All signs of city under siege were effectively concealed. It was a solid effort on the part of the White House producers who slapped this comedy together. Particularly admirable were the scenes of enraptured Iraqis waving flags and gyrating with abandon on the streets of Baghdad. What American could watch such a heartwarming demonstration of elation and not feel choked-up by the great gift Bush has bestowed on these simple people.
Alas, it was all a hoax as well. As Robert Fisk opines in his latest article in the UK Independent, he stumbled on "three truckloads of youths, all brandishing Iraqi flags-like the unemployed who have been sticking posters to Baghdad's walls-paid by the government to 'advertise' the election. And there was a cameraman from state television."
"Paid by the government"?
Ah-ha! Yet another public relations ploy like the carefully choreographed toppling of Saddam in Fidros Square, or the staged landing of "Top-Gun" Georgie B. on the USS Lincoln; this time arranged and financed by ex-CIA operative (and former Saddam agent) Iyad Allawi.
Shame, shame, shame!...but, good theatre none the less. And, besides, the charges of fraud won't be forthcoming anytime soon. For now, the balloting is being celebrated by the media as another positive step towards the anticipated "transfer of power". Just listen to the unanimity of the approbation from the press: "Iraqis Brave Bombs to vote in Millions" MSNBC... "This is Democracy!" Reuters... "Brave Voters defy Rebels" NY Post... "Iraqis begin Historic Vote" Washington Times.
Anyway, you get the idea. A quick perusing of Google headlines produces 1,468 stories with nearly identical bylines. The western press is either besotted with Iraq's "alleged" metamorphosis or they're getting their marching orders from "Sec-Def" at the Pentagon. Either way, don't waste your time looking for divergent points of view in the establishment media. Anything that fails to harmonize with the Conquistador agenda has been conscientiously extracted by the roots.
NYT's profound remorse for the deceased
The "Paper of Record" gave its typically glib assessment of the elections by noting "a comparatively peaceful day of voting". In the parlance of the New York Times that means that only 41 Iraqis will killed; "chump-change" for America's prodigious war-machine, unless, of course, you happen to be the unhappy wife or child who just lost your father or brother to a nervous Marine with a hair-trigger finger. In any event that's not the business of the NYTs. They've got a war to cover and (like Tommy Franks says) they don't do body counts.
Similarly, Corporate George added his voice to the chorus of praise with his characteristic chest-thumping, "I-told-you-so" rhetoric saying "The people of Iraq have spoken to the world, and the world is hearing the voice of freedom from the center of the Middle East....Terrorists and insurgents will continue to wage their war against democracy, but we will support the Iraqi people in their fight against them." And, Blah, blah, blah; like the shallow whistling of hot air emerging from a flat tire.
George W. may be crowing "victory" a bit prematurely. Iraq is not quite ready for the trophy-case along side Bush's Warlord-dominated, drug-colony, Afghanistan. And, despite the celebratory braying from the obsequious press, 20% of the population boycotted the elections, and that 20% (Sunnis) have ruled Iraq as long as anyone can remember. They'll have their say before the day is done.
Bush can revel in his Pyrrhic victory; everyone enjoys seeing happy, ballot-clutching folks mugging for the cameras. But, beyond the circumscribed range of the media, the fighting rages on.
Attacks on the polls occurred in Baghdad, Balad, Basra, Baquba, Hilla, Kirkuk, Mosul, Tal Afar, Al-Duluiya, Al-Mhawil, Al Muqtadiya and Samarra. This is the tragic litany of the Torturer-in-Chief's ongoing depredations in Iraq; a list that will be faithfully excluded from today's festive coverage of election results. Reality rarely intrudes into the bubble of managed perceptions that encloses the American public. Today will be no different.
The suffering, torture and death unleashed by America's blundering military campaign have been temporarily suspended to rejoice in this moment of unalloyed, Orwellian ecstasy. Bush has acquired his fig leaf of legitimacy and the rudiments of a client regime that will assist him in his long-range goals, but at what cost to both Iraq's future and America's prestige. The desperation of this electoral fiasco is reminiscent of a skydiver grasping at a frayed ripcord as he tumbles downward through the ether.
There's a hard landing ahead. [/font]