By Ghali Hassan
02/04/05 "Information
Clearing House"
-- It is true that millions of Iraqis have participated in the
"elections", but by international standard, the turnout was very low.
On the day of the elections Iraq was in a state of siege, cut off from
all directions. Journalists were also limited to areas of higher
turnout, and the international monitors stayed in Jordan, 1200 km from
Iraq. The elections were designed to provide legitimacy to US
Occupation.
By Ghali Hassan
02/04/05 "Information
Clearing House"
-- It is true that millions of Iraqis have participated in the
"elections", but by international standard, the turnout was very low.
On the day of the elections Iraq was in a state of siege, cut off from
all directions. Journalists were also limited to areas of higher
turnout, and the international monitors stayed in Jordan, 1200 km from
Iraq. The elections were designed to provide legitimacy to US
Occupation. Despite the illegitimacy of the
elections, which are held under foreign military occupation, Iraqis who
came out for the elections voted to end the occupation, not to endorse
its continuity. About 7 million of the 18 million eligible Iraqi voters
in Iraq and about 280,000 of the 4 million Iraqi voters outside Iraq
voted in the elections. They were hoping that their participation would
lead to an end of occupation and violence in their homeland.
Mainstream media and western pundits sold the elections as the ‘road
toward democracy'. The opposite is true. The purpose of the elections
was to persuade the outside world, particularly the US citizens, to
support the occupation and US foreign policy. US interests have very
little to do with fair elections and democracy.
According to the US-based Carter Centre, which monitored elections
around the world, the US have endorsed illegitimate and fraud elections
in Azerbaijan but rejected or disendorsed legitimate and democratic
elections in Venezuela. Further, the Centre did not participate in the
Iraq's elections because Iraq's elections do not met the elections'
criteria, such as free and safe environment, and the ability of
candidates to move freely. The candidates, with their identities remain
secret, are those who entered Iraq on the back of US tanks,
collaborated with the Occupation, and depend on it for survival. All
independent voices in Iraq, regardless of ethnicity, have boycotted the
elections.
The Bush administration claims that the elections are somehow an
endorsement for the war and the Occupation are misleading and untrue.
The war is an illegal act of aggression in violations of international
law. The occupation is against the wishes of the majority of the Iraqi
people. All Iraqis are in favour of free and fair elections as long as
the occupation forces withdraw from Iraq. The US brought nothing good
to Iraq. It brought destruction and has encouraged the eventual
division of Iraq on sectarian lines. Military occupation by force is
not freedom or liberty.
Future Iraq submissive to US imperialism put flagrantly by two
mainstream media outlets in the US. The Washington Post argued that the
elections in Iraq constituted "an answer to the question of whether the
mission in Iraq remains a just cause." The Los Angeles Times ranted,
"the world could honestly see American troops making it possible for a
long-oppressed people to choose their destiny." The Iraqi people have
voted to end US domination even if they voted in illegitimate
elections.
Juan Cole, the American Blogger and textbooks "experts" on Iraq told
C-Span Washington Journal on 27 January 2005, that, "Iraq is like South
Africa during the Apartheid regime [a major US ally], the US had to
invade and change the regime of Saddam and give power to the Shiites
majority". The comment is not only ill informed and misleading; it is
foolish. Also, Shiites as a majority is very disputed figure in Iraq
itself. Mr Cole also said that he studied Iraq in the US from textbooks
because he "couldn't get visa to do fieldwork in Iraq during Saddam
regime". This is utterly untrue. Iraq has been very frequent
destination by Westerners, such as workers, scientists and
archaeologists. My 85 years-old father once said: "Our family have
lived on this River [the Tigris] for generations, and we have not
experienced the kind of division and racism Western, and particularly
American pundits and academics are promoting in order to sell
themselves and their books". Only in the West people are ranting about
Iraq's division and Iraq's ethnicity. The elections were designed to
establish sectarianism in Iraq, not democracy.
Iraqis Sunnis, Shiites and Christians have lived together since the rise
of Islam. There has never been a civil war, or talk about civil war in
Iraq. Suddenly everyone is talking about civil war in Iraq. Civil wars
are imperialism useful tools to rule the native peoples and provide
fodder for domestic consumption. The more the natives are divided, the
easier to rule them and exploit them. Iraq's problem is not an
internal problem; it is a Western-created problem. The US and Britain
fabricated lies in order to invade Iraq, remove a nationalist
government, and seize control of Iraq's oil reserves. Saddam was a
pretext for an illegal war of aggression in violations of international
law.
Saddam and his regime is now the West "moral compass". The more he is
demonised, the brutal the US treatment of the Iraqi people becomes.
This is very evident in the passive stand Western and American citizens
took in response to the torture, abuse and murder of Iraqi prisoners at
Abu Ghraib and other prisons throughout Iraq. An experiment in human
torture has been validated and accepted in the West, but only if the
victims are the "others".
The recent scientific study in the prestigious British journal The
Lancet showing that there were more than 100,000 Iraqi civilians killed
as a result of US invasion and occupation, was immediately ignored in
the Anglo-Saxon countries, particularly the US. By contrast, the death
of 3000 citizens as a result of the 9/11 attacks is repeated daily in
order to justify war and occupation of other countries.
According to recent polls reported in the September 26, 2004 of The
Seattle Times, 98 per cent of Iraqis want the Americans to leave their
country. The majority of the Iraqi people have also boycotted the
elections. The elections are a farce. They are rigged and forced on the
Iraqi people at gunpoint in order to elect candidates who support the
continuing of the US Occupation. For Iraqis, the elections did not
change anything on the ground, the deliberate destruction of their
country and society will continue.
The Bush administration is increasing its hold on the country, using the
pretexts of democracy and fraudulent elections to legitimise the
Occupation. Who ever win in these elections will remain in power only
with the support of US occupation forces. The elections form part of
the foundation for a corrupt colonial dictatorship in Iraq. This is
evident in the US refusal to agree to a timetable for troops withdrawal
and prevents further escalation in violence, and continues to build
military bases there against the wishes of the Iraqi people.
If the US wants to end the violence, an exit strategy to end the US
Occupation of Iraq is now available. The elections should provide a
first step to free Iraq from US occupation, and allow the Iraqi people
to build their society and their country free from foreign domination.
Ghali Hassan lives in Perth Western Australia. He can be reached at e-mail:
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Copyright © Information
Clearing House.
All rights reserved. You may republish under the following conditions:
An active link to the original publication must be provided. You must
not alter, edit or remove any text within the article, including this
copyright notice.
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |