HOME
DV NEWS
SERVICE ARCHIVE SUBMISSIONS/CONTACT ABOUT DV
Bush’s
Vietnam
Once
More, we Hear that America is being "sucked Into a quagmire." The
rapacious adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan are going badly wrong
by
John Pilger
June
23, 2003
America's
two "great victories" since 11 September 2001 are unravelling. In
Afghanistan, the regime of Hamid Karzai has virtually no authority and no
money, and would collapse without American guns. Al-Qaeda has not been
defeated, and the Taliban are re-emerging. Regardless of showcase improvements,
the situation of women and children remains desperate. The token woman in
Karzai's cabinet, the courageous physician Sima Samar, has been forced out of
government and is now in constant fear of her life, with an armed guard outside
her office door and another at her gate. Murder, rape and child abuse are
committed with impunity by the private armies of America's "friends",
the warlords whom Washington has bribed with millions of dollars, cash in hand,
to give the pretence of stability.
"We
are in a combat zone the moment we leave this base," an American colonel
told me at Bagram airbase, near Kabul. "We are shot at every day, several
times a day." When I said that surely he had come to liberate and protect
the people, he belly-laughed.
American
troops are rarely seen in Afghanistan's towns. They escort US officials at high
speed in armoured vans with blackened windows and military vehicles, mounted
with machine-guns, in front and behind. Even the vast Bagram base was
considered too insecure for the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, during his
recent, fleeting visit. So nervous are the Americans that a few weeks ago they "accidentally"
shot dead four government soldiers in the centre of Kabul, igniting the second
major street protest against their presence in a week.
On
the day I left Kabul, a car bomb exploded on the road to the airport, killing
four German soldiers, members of the international security force Isaf. The
Germans' bus was lifted into the air; human flesh lay on the roadside. When
British soldiers arrived to "seal off" the area, they were watched by
a silent crowd, squinting into the heat and dust, across a divide as wide as
that which separated British troops from Afghans in the 19th century, and the
French from Algerians and Americans from Vietnamese.
In
Iraq, scene of the second "great victory", there are two open
secrets. The first is that the "terrorists" now besieging the
American occupation force represent an armed resistance that is almost
certainly supported by the majority of Iraqis who, contrary to pre-war
propaganda, opposed their enforced "liberation" (see Jonathan
Steele's investigation, 19 March 2003, www.guardian.co.uk).
The second secret is that there is emerging evidence of the true scale of the
Anglo-American killing, pointing to the bloodbath Bush and Blair have always
denied.
Comparisons
with Vietnam have been made so often over the years that I hesitate to draw
another. However, the similarities are striking: for example, the return of
expressions such as "sucked into a quagmire". This suggests, once
again, that the Americans are victims, not invaders: the approved Hollywood
version when a rapacious adventure goes wrong. Since Saddam Hussein's statue
was toppled almost three months ago, more Americans have been killed than
during the war. Ten have been killed and 25 wounded in classic guerrilla
attacks on roadblocks and checkpoints which may number as many as a dozen a
day.
The
Americans call the guerrillas "Saddam loyalists" and "Ba'athist
fighters", in the same way they used to dismiss the Vietnamese as
"communists". Recently, in Falluja, in the Sunni heartland of Iraq,
it was clearly not the presence of Ba'athists or Saddamists, but the brutal
behaviour of the occupiers, who fired point-blank at a crowd, that inspired the
resistance. The American tanks gunning down a family of shepherds is
reminiscent of the gunning down of a shepherd, his family and sheep by
"coalition" aircraft in a "no-fly zone" four years ago,
whose aftermath I filmed and which evoked, for me, the murderous games American
aircraft used to play in Vietnam, gunning down farmers in their fields,
children on their buffaloes.
On
12 June, a large American force attacked a "terrorist base" north of
Baghdad and left more than 100 dead, according to a US spokesman. The term
"terrorist" is important, because it implies that the likes of
al-Qaeda are attacking the liberators, and so the connection between Iraq and
11 September is made, which in pre-war propaganda was never made.
More
than 400 prisoners were taken in this operation. The majority have reportedly joined
thousands of Iraqis in a "holding facility" at Baghdad airport: a
concentration camp along the lines of Bagram, from where people are shipped to
Guantanamo Bay. In Afghanistan, the Americans pick up taxi drivers and send
them into oblivion, via Bagram. Like Pinochet's boys in Chile, they are making
their perceived enemies "disappear".
"Search
and destroy", the scorched-earth tactic from Vietnam, is back. In the arid
south-eastern plains of Afghanistan, the village of Niazi Qala no longer
stands. American airborne troops swept down before dawn on 30 December 2001 and
slaughtered, among others, a wedding party. Villagers said that women and
children ran towards a dried pond, seeking protection from the gunfire, and
were shot as they ran. After two hours, the aircraft and the attackers left.
According to a United Nations investigation, 52 people were killed, including
25 children. "We identified it as a military target," says the
Pentagon, echoing its initial response to the My Lai massacre 35 years ago.
The
targeting of civilians has long been a journalistic taboo in the west.
Accredited monsters did that, never "us". The civilian death toll of
the 1991 Gulf war was wildly underestimated. Almost a year later, a
comprehensive study by the Medical Education Trust in London estimated that
more than 200,000 Iraqis had died during and immediately after the war, as a
direct or indirect consequence of attacks on civilian infrastructure. The
report was all but ignored. This month, Iraq Body Count, a group of American
and British academics and researchers, estimated that up to 10,000 civilians
may have been killed in Iraq, including 2,356 civilians in the attack on
Baghdad alone. And this is likely to be an extremely conservative figure.
In
Afghanistan, there has been similar carnage. In May last year, Jonathan Steele
extrapolated all the available field evidence of the human cost of the US
bombing and concluded that as many as 20,000 Afghans may have lost their lives
as an indirect consequence of the bombing, many of them drought victims denied
relief.
This
"hidden" effect is hardly new. A recent study at Columbia University
in New York has found that the spraying of Agent Orange and other herbicides on
Vietnam was up to four times as great as previously estimated. Agent Orange
contained dioxin, one of the deadliest poisons known. In what they first called
Operation Hades, then changed to the friendlier Operation Ranch Hand, the
Americans in Vietnam destroyed, in some 10,000 "missions" to spray
Agent Orange, almost half the forests of southern Vietnam, and countless human
lives. It was the most insidious and perhaps the most devastating use of a
chemical weapon of mass destruction ever. Today, Vietnamese children continue
to be born with a range of deformities, or they are stillborn, or the foetuses
are aborted.
The
use of uranium-tipped munitions evokes the catastrophe of Agent Orange. In the
first Gulf war in 1991, the Americans and British used 350 tonnes of depleted
uranium. According to the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, quoting an
international study, 50 tonnes of DU, if inhaled or ingested, would cause
500,000 deaths. Most of the victims are civilians in southern Iraq. It is
estimated that 2,000 tonnes were used during the latest attack.
In
a remarkable series of reports for the Christian Science Monitor, the
investigative reporter Scott Peterson has described radiated bullets in the
streets of Baghdad and radiation-contaminated tanks, where children play
without warning. Belatedly, a few signs in Arabic have appeared: "Danger -
Get away from this area". At the same time, in Afghanistan, the Uranium
Medical Research Centre, based in Canada, has made two field studies, with the
results described as "shocking". "Without exception," it
reported, "at every bomb site investigated, people are ill. A significant
portion of the civilian population presents symptoms consistent with internal
contamination by uranium."
An
official map distributed to non-government agencies in Iraq shows that the
American and British military have plastered urban areas with cluster bombs,
many of which will have failed to detonate on impact. These usually lie
unnoticed until children pick them up, then they explode.
In
the centre of Kabul, I found two ragged notices warning people that the rubble
of their homes, and streets, contained unexploded cluster bombs "made in
USA". Who reads them? Small children? The day I watched children skipping
through what might have been an urban minefield, I saw Tony Blair on CNN in the
lobby of my hotel. He was in Iraq, in Basra, lifting a child into his arms, in
a school that had been painted for his visit, and where lunch had been prepared
in his honour, in a city where basic services such as education, food and water
remain a shambles under the British occupation.
It
was in Basra three years ago that I filmed hundreds of children ill and dying
because they had been denied cancer treatment equipment and drugs under an
embargo enforced with enthusiasm by Tony Blair. Now here he was - shirt open, with
that fixed grin, a man of the troops if not of the people - lifting a toddler
into his arms for the cameras.
When
I returned to London, I read "After Lunch", by Harold Pinter, from a
new collection of his called War (Faber & Faber).
And
after noon the well-dressed creatures come
To
sniff among the dead
And
have their lunch
And
all the many well-dressed creatures pluck
The
swollen avocados from the dust
And
stir the minestrone with stray bones
And
after lunch
They
loll and lounge about
Decanting
claret in convenient skulls
John Pilger is a renowned investigative
journalist and documentary filmmaker. His latest book is The New Rulers of
the World (Verso, 2002). Visit John Pilger’s website at: http://www.johnpilger.com. This article first appeared in the New Statesman.