Towards Baghdad

branding-border

Chaos | Xaoc.

Iraq

branding-border

2003

Towards Baghdad
Iraq is the first destination during this journey because of its unique history. Until 35,000 BC, northern Iraq was dominated by a Neanderthal culture. From around 10,000 BC, these lands were part of the cradle of the culture known as Pre-Pottery Neolithic, where agriculture and cattle breeding appeared for the first time in the world. Historically, Iraq began in about 4000 BC, when a Sumerian civilization developed in these areas which is the earliest known civilization. It arose in the fertile Tigris-Euphrates river valley of southern Iraq. During this period the world's first writing system and recorded history was noted. Those writings recorded also the first evidence of Mathematics, Astronomy, Astrology, Written Law, Medicine and Organized religion. The Sumerians were the first to harness the wheel and create City States.
War in Iraq, 2003
As a historian Norman Davies says, the attack on Iraq in 2003 could have been avoided or at least its consequences could have been mitigated. However, in case of this conflict the author does not blame greed or political goals only, but ignorance. Davies believes that the responsibility for this includes some changes in the education system that were introduced gradually since the 1960s.

  1. The Iraqis are not a "nation". Iraq is both an artificial and relatively young creation (Since 1918, after the sudden collapse of the Ottoman Empire).
  2. Contemporary Iraq is an explosive puzzle composed of Mosul (inhabited mostly by Kurds), Baghdad (inhabited by a privileged in the Empire group of Arab Sunnis) and Basra (inhabited by Arab Shiites, reluctant to Sunnis and supported by Shiites from Iran). The construction of a democratic state composed of such different components would be slow and problematic even under the most favorable conditions.
  3. ...
  4. Due to the centuries-long domination of the Ottoman Empire, the inhabitants of modern Iraq are looking at any external interference at least with reluctance. All attempts to reunite Iraq through outside interference have failed in the past. An example is the failed British experiment to impose the supremacy of the Hashemite dynasty from Jordan. According to Davies, another compelling argument against the intervention is that the people of Iraq know "Western rhetoric and they are well aware of how few people from West care about the life and death of non-Westerners."
  5. Even a brief study of a relatively recent history of the state of Iraq suggests an unequivocal conclusion about the close ties with neighboring states. These relations were the basis during the formation of the identity of this troubled nation. Aversion to Israel (and all its derivatives) is a part of this process ( and it is as new as deeply entrenched in this case)
  6. In 1968, Iraq's power was seized by the Ba’ath regime. It was based on secularism, Arab nationalism and pseudo-democratic socialism. It was probably modeled on a different regime: Soviet communism, which supported several similar regimes in the Arab world. The sworn enemies of this regime were, on the one hand, the Arab monarchies - in Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf - and on the other hand, the Islamist movement, whose religious radicalism was an alternative to Baathism. The regime found allies in Syria, Egypt and Libya. Like all forms of Arab nationalism, it was in opposition to the Jewish State of Israel. Conclusion: The occupation of Iraq by American-led forces must appear to most Iraqis as an act of violence in the interests of the Arab monarchies, Israel and, of course, the United States itself.
  7. Saddam Husajn. Hussein assumed supremacy of the aforementioned Ba'ath party in 1979 and is widely regarded as a bloodthirsty, repulsive and greedy tyrant. However, Hussein has built a solid political base over the years thanks to the support of the Sunni clans. They believed that Hussein equalized the divisions introduced by Kurds and Shiites, as well as that he contributed to strengthening the Iraqi army. The insight is obvious. Hussein's removal must have resulted in a period of instability or anarchy throughout the Middle East. Hussein himself was hostile to Islamism, so the argument about terrorist networks deployed in Iraq doesn't make much sense. In the late 90's of the 20th century, there was no evidence that Iraq possessed nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. The only known fact was Israel's preventive attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor Osirak in 1981. The Americans were convinced of Hussein's desire to retaliate against Israel, so the American attack was understood as protecting their client: Israel.
  8. Between the 80's and early 90’s two more Iraqi armed attacks on Iran (with US approval) and Kuwait (without this approval) claimed millions of civilians and resulted in severe UN sanctions. The Iraqis suffered from poverty for which they blamed the British and American armed forces controlling compliance with these sanctions
    Norman Davies " Europe: East and West"