Cheers in Baghdad
EmailABC News correspondent Miguel Marquez reports from Baghdad, on reactions to the death of al-Zarqawi: Iraqi reaction to the killing of al-Zarqawi mirrors the complexities of the Iraq war itself. Officially there was cheering as Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki announced that al-Zarqawi had been “terminated.” (Being from California I had to wonder about his choice of words. “Terminated?” Did I hear a slight Austrian accent to his Arabic when he announced it? In Baghdad there was dancing in the streets, literally. Iraqi police officers waved their guns in the air and did a sort of hop and shuffle as news of al-Zarqawi’s death pulsed through the streets. In Sadr city, home to some two and a half million chronically poor Shi’ite muslims, children chanted and sang “death to Zarqawi.” Many Sunni muslims in Baghdad were quick to point out that, though they despised al-Zarqawi, he – and his brand of al Qaeda – were American creations. A man named Hussein from Baghdad’s Karada district complained “we have only had Zarqawi since the Americans entered Iraq, why did he come to Iraq?” In the village of Hibhib – north of Baghdad – where al-Zarqawi died there was mistrust of US intentions and denial that he even existed. One man said that the US only said al-Zarqawi was there so it could destroy their homes. In other parts of Iraq the al-Zarqawi reaction was on mute. In the Kurdish north there was barely a thought given to who, or how important, al-Zarqawi was. In the southern Shi’ite city of Basra people were happy he was gone but there were none of the emotional displays seen in Baghdad. Perhaps the biggest question looming in Iraqis’ minds was whether the end of al-Zarqawi meant the beginning of something new. The all important Ministers or Defense and Interior were approved shortly after the announcement that al-Zarqawi was dead. Many Iraqis hoped this meant a new start for a government that appeared to be on life support only yesterday.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
The death of al-Zarqawi seems inevitable, given the stage and cast of characters that has been assembled in Iraq as a result of the US-led invasion. There would not have been the need for this Jordanian to be in Iraq and to have such prominence as he has been given had not the invasion taken place. He is/was the bogeyman who was required to appear as a focus of Mr Bush’s morality play.
The creation of a ‘bad guy’ by the US, and then the happy news of the destruction of that negative force reduces the situation to the most simplistic black-and-white scenario. It is a scenario that is made to lead the minds and emotions of all who watch the performance.
The classic anti-hero creation serves the purpose of making the viewer the hero. In this case, of course, that’s the intent. The US needed the creation of a ‘bully in the school yard’ to justify its own actions, past present and future.
Presenting a war as if it’s kabuki theatre for the American public’s consumption is insulting and makes puppets and stooges of the audience.
Should we persist in this pattern of conflict management, we will do ourselves great damage and we will never be able to extricate ourselves. The presentation of the conflict has been reduced to a struggle of good against evil…. that classic protestant/puritan concept that reduces everything to black and white, ignoring all the shades of gray.
al-Zarqawi has been wriiten out of the script, but the bogeyman is still present. The US is its own enemy so long as it insists upon finding evil at every opportunity. Watching such a character as the US on the boards of any theatre only brings a weariness to the audience, until such time as that character becomes enlightened. Our character is that of an immature, but physically strong man/boy who leads with his ego. He has a fierce and self-righteous determination, but cannot succeed without maturation and the eventual integration into his family.
The conflict situation that we are now in will not improve until we mature. We must re-examine our relationships with the countries surrounding Iraq and make substantial changes. We need their assistance to ever peacefully withdraw. Iraq (by whatever form it may eventually take) needs the support of its sister countries in every sense. That is absolutely impossible with the current US foreign relations.
The settlement of this conflict and our ability to disengage requires that we use the tried-and-true method of installing a dictator or that we launch into a massive recontruction of our image and purpose, both in Iraq and in the Mid-East.
Posted by: David | June 9, 2006, 7:41 am 7:41 am
Well written…but not long enough! We always enjoy Marquez on the air.
Posted by: bonnie | June 9, 2006, 10:10 am 10:10 am
Miguel Marquez is a reporter for the 21st century. More, More, More. Thanks for an honest and insightful report.
Posted by: Alison | June 9, 2006, 1:07 pm 1:07 pm
Can I share some resources with you?
Posted by: floyd | July 5, 2006, 6:23 pm 6:23 pm