Tweet
Tony Shadid has a marvelously complex piece about what Greil Marcus would call the lipstick traces of the U.S. occupation of Iraq: the Baghdad tattoo artist who modifies American styles; the hesher who improbably dreams of becoming a Texas "country boy"; the Iraqi soldier who now wears the kneepads and thigh holster of his American counterparts. All this — tweaked-English idioms; cans of chewing tobacco; maybe something approaching a democratic order — will remain after the final American soldier departs. The Iraqis Shadid interviews have unresolved feelings about this unfolding legacy.
"I’m not defending their presence, but that’s not all it was. We have to be honest," Kasim told his friend. "We paid a very high price, but it was the price of freedom."
Chayan shook his head.
"We haven’t seen a bright side," he said. "Well, there’s no bright side to colonization, we can say that. But the Americans could have left something positive behind. What makes me sad, wherever I go, whenever I go, I just see remains of destruction."
Read the whole piece. It ends on an indictment of the occupation — and, more notably, those who lived through it — that’s no less potent for its elegant subtlety. But if the basic idea is that the culture of the occupation is an enduring one, it’s hard not to connect Shadid’s piece to this recent New York Times account of "lovelorn" Iraqi boys planting IEDs outside the houses of the girls who reject them. This is from a Baghdad police captain confronting the latest twist in sexual menacing and domination:
“I’m a detective, and I don’t even know how to make one of these, but all these kids do,” the captain said. “There was a percentage of young men who were cooperating with the Al Qaeda organizations, or the Shia militias. They’ve changed their minds about fighting now, but they still have good experience in how to make I.E.D.’s.”
It’s a shame that the Times piece is written in a lighthearted fashion, since the development it describes is the transference of guerilla and terrorist warfare onto gender relationships. The Americans may be on the way out, but this ought to teach that bitch to think she’s too good for me. Another legacy of subjugation and warfare.
6 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
Don’t you think we might be missing an opportunity with those boys who try to blow up their ex girlfriends or teachers? Hell I don’t think they learned how to make IEDs all on their own so at the very least they might actually be able to lead back to the people who taught them. Not only that they could give some valuable insight into the mindset of whatever insurgents there are left. But maybe most valuable of all why not round these kids up and turn them into demolitions experts who can help defuse bombs after we leave? Now to be sure some of them wouldn’t be good prospects because if they are trying to blow up girlfriends they might be a little off their rocker. But if they know how to rig up explosives why not use that fact to our advantage? I would have to believe that whenever it is that we pull out bomb disposal is going to be a huge deal in Iraq. Why not use those kids like our government has used hackers for years. Bring them into the fold so they can help guard against other more violent bombers?
Good ideas in theory. But the Iraqi government is facing a budget crisis due to its reliance on oil revenue as oil prices drop sharply. And the era when U.S. cash would pay for bringing Iraqi malcontents onto the payroll as security auxiliaries — that is, the Sons of Iraq/Awakening Council — has already ended.
I wasn’t actually talking about anything like the payoffs the Sons of Iraq got to kind of stay on the sidelines. Moreso I am talking about annexing these kids into a bomb removal force for either the Iraqi Army or the local police forces. I realize that they have a budget crisis but honestly I think it would be worth our while to fund such a project for them that will give these kids a job that they can keep long after we are gone doing work that they will actually need for years and years going forward. That keeps them out of the conflict and keeps them too busy to be blowing up their girlfriends or teachers. And I think its assured that eventually as long as Iraq doesn’t fall back into sectarian violence the oil revenues will go up as the prices go back up and at some point they will be able to pay for those positions themselves. But to me the reason why this is would be the opposite of the Sons of Iraq deal is because we see now that purges are happening whereby the Iragi government is getting rid of many of the people we were paying to stay on the sidelines. But I don’t think we ever equipped them with any kinds of meaningful job skills other than just token jobs to keep their loyalty. And I think everyone knew at some point that honeymoon would end and that it would be likely the Sons of Iraq would be pushed right back out into the streets and some of them are probably going to end up back committing sectarian attacks. These IED kids would have job security and a purpose that their people could admire.
Everything you say is sensible and forward-looking, and that’s probably a good indicator that the Iraqi government won’t implement any of it.
LOL but I can dream can’t I?
“…it was the price of freedom.”
Chayan shook his head.
“We haven’t seen a bright side,”
Looks like we gave them American political divisions as well. I predict 30 years from now Chayan will have co-opted most of his friend’s optimism in response to the complete undermining of Kasim’s party by Salafist infiltrators initially invited in as GOtV volunteers.
“…laminated on his coffee table; a stuffed Taz, the Tasmanian devil from Looney Tunes; an Incredible Hulk action figure. His shirt, embossed with images of Tupac Shakur and Snoop Dogg, reads, “The Hood, the Bad and The Guilty.“
You know this guy, Spencer?
And @sgwhiteinfl, I’ve always liked–loved really–the Frank Abagnale Jr. solution. Unfortunately, ever since the Willie Horton ad, it’s been politically impossible as a use of US taxpayer dollars outside of a few ultraliberal enclaves dealing with very minor very local crimes. There’s the witness protection program, but their identity hiding efforts are as much about keeping the witnesses from being political pawns as keeping them from getting whacked. Child soldier adoption/relocations are an all-NGO project these days. Still, I love the idea, you just need to find the Overton extreme option and argue for that before coming back to this as the compromise.