Tweet
The Mountain Press, TN
June 11 2005
Absence of policies makes it hard to speak about Iraq
The most frequent and difficult question asked of me since returning
from Iraq has been: "What positive or helpful news can you tell us
about the mess in Iraq?"
The answer that the 2/278th, the "Tennessee Peacemakers," is doing a
marvelous job preparing their area for transfer to Iraqis'
responsibility for security does not seem to satisfy the questioners.
One reason that makes it hard to speak positively about progress in
Iraq is the absence of stated long-term American policies for the
Middle East and western Asia.
The Kurds may offer a partial answer of hope. United for the first
time, the Kurds have enjoyed nearly 15 years of semi-autonomy. They
owe that respite from oppression to the U.S. and acknowledge it
gratefully. Most Kurds would like a long-term partnership with the
U.S.
One possible positive outcome of America's invasion and occupation of
Iraq could be a secure, long-term air base in Kurdistan. Turkey could
terminate our high-rent bases at any time, especially if fanatic
religious parties gain the few more votes they need to control the
Turkish parliament. In any case, U.S. airbases in Turkey are
positioned against Russia, not for controlling the petroleum Middle
East or Western Asia.
If you listen carefully to U.S. government claims about the
importance of Iraq, you hear "central" emphasized. Iraq is not
central to the Arab world. Iraq is the Arabs' border with Farsi
(Indo-European) speaking Iran and Turkish (Turko-Ugaritic) speaking
Asia Minor (Turkey). Egypt's population is four times Iraq's.
For the past seven centuries, Egypt and Syria have been culturally
and politically more central to the Arabs than Iraq. Economically,
Arabia and the Gulf eclipse the rest of the Arab world. The only way
Iraq could be considered central would be strategically if the U.S.
plans to be a new imperialist power in western Asia and the Middle
East.
An air base in Kurdistan (northern Iraq today) could dominate as far
east as Pakistan and Afghanistan and as far north as Uzbekistan where
the U.S. has a temporary base. It would put Turkmenistan well within
range. It was Turkmenistan's natural gas and oil that took the USSR
into Afghanistan and the U.S. and our mercenary Muslims - the
Mujahidiin - there to get the Communists out. Turkmenistan may be a
more pressing reason for the U.S. return to Afghanistan than Osama
bin Laden.
While the west dickers with Iraq, China may pre-empt access to
Turkmenistan's gas and oil, a key to 21st century power.
An air base in Kurdistan could dominate Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia
and our present Turkish allies as well as everywhere in the Arab
world from the Nile eastward. It would be especially protective for
America's clients: Israel and the Sauds. If the United States aspires
to be a new imperialist power, then northern Iraq, Kurdistan, is
central.
- Graham Leonard, of Johnson City, went to Iraq as an embedded
journalist with the 2/278th.
June 11 2005
Absence of policies makes it hard to speak about Iraq
The most frequent and difficult question asked of me since returning
from Iraq has been: "What positive or helpful news can you tell us
about the mess in Iraq?"
The answer that the 2/278th, the "Tennessee Peacemakers," is doing a
marvelous job preparing their area for transfer to Iraqis'
responsibility for security does not seem to satisfy the questioners.
One reason that makes it hard to speak positively about progress in
Iraq is the absence of stated long-term American policies for the
Middle East and western Asia.
The Kurds may offer a partial answer of hope. United for the first
time, the Kurds have enjoyed nearly 15 years of semi-autonomy. They
owe that respite from oppression to the U.S. and acknowledge it
gratefully. Most Kurds would like a long-term partnership with the
U.S.
One possible positive outcome of America's invasion and occupation of
Iraq could be a secure, long-term air base in Kurdistan. Turkey could
terminate our high-rent bases at any time, especially if fanatic
religious parties gain the few more votes they need to control the
Turkish parliament. In any case, U.S. airbases in Turkey are
positioned against Russia, not for controlling the petroleum Middle
East or Western Asia.
If you listen carefully to U.S. government claims about the
importance of Iraq, you hear "central" emphasized. Iraq is not
central to the Arab world. Iraq is the Arabs' border with Farsi
(Indo-European) speaking Iran and Turkish (Turko-Ugaritic) speaking
Asia Minor (Turkey). Egypt's population is four times Iraq's.
For the past seven centuries, Egypt and Syria have been culturally
and politically more central to the Arabs than Iraq. Economically,
Arabia and the Gulf eclipse the rest of the Arab world. The only way
Iraq could be considered central would be strategically if the U.S.
plans to be a new imperialist power in western Asia and the Middle
East.
An air base in Kurdistan (northern Iraq today) could dominate as far
east as Pakistan and Afghanistan and as far north as Uzbekistan where
the U.S. has a temporary base. It would put Turkmenistan well within
range. It was Turkmenistan's natural gas and oil that took the USSR
into Afghanistan and the U.S. and our mercenary Muslims - the
Mujahidiin - there to get the Communists out. Turkmenistan may be a
more pressing reason for the U.S. return to Afghanistan than Osama
bin Laden.
While the west dickers with Iraq, China may pre-empt access to
Turkmenistan's gas and oil, a key to 21st century power.
An air base in Kurdistan could dominate Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia
and our present Turkish allies as well as everywhere in the Arab
world from the Nile eastward. It would be especially protective for
America's clients: Israel and the Sauds. If the United States aspires
to be a new imperialist power, then northern Iraq, Kurdistan, is
central.
- Graham Leonard, of Johnson City, went to Iraq as an embedded
journalist with the 2/278th.