The View from Lahore: What Pakistanis Think of Iraq's Liberation

By Nadia Iqbal

Lahore (Pakistan): For a war that had been fought for the most part on the television screens, the climax seemed a scene right out of a Hollywood movie. In the comfort of our living rooms we had watched images of hurtling missiles, fiery explosions and civilian casualties; children, women and elderly burnt, dismembered or wounded.

And then 21 days into the war America was at last able to show to the world the scenes it had been promising right from the beginning—a crowd of jubilant ‘Iraqis’ tearing down a bronze statue of Saddam Hussain conveniently situated right in front of the Palestine hotel in Baghdad where all the international journalists were staying. Call it sheer luck or great military planning, but the scenes had viewers all around the world glued to their television screens for the better part of about an hour and a half. The scenes were played over and over again on international news channels making the fall of the regime seem more real and certain with each rerun. Iraq’s Ambassador to UN, Mohammad Al Douri’s statement ‘The game is over’ was also played repeatedly seemingly sealing the fate of the regime.

“But war is not some kind of harmless video game,” insists Mohsin, a computer science student (and an enthusiastic video game player himself). Referring to General William Wallace’s statement early in the war--"The enemy we are fighting is different from the one we had war gamed against"--he says, “Personally I would have liked George Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney to be embedded with journalists in the front lines to get a taste of what it feels like to be on the receiving of an artillery barrage rather than miles away in the comfort of the White House enjoying live television coverage”.

Now even though the fog of war has cleared, people are still questioning the legal justification for the war.

“Just because its over doesn’t mean it was right in the first place”, says Mohsin. “If Iraq is in contravention of 17 UN resolutions Israel has breached more than 70. If the possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) was the reason, are we blind and deaf to the fact that what hasn’t been established in Iraq despite thousands of UN inspections is very much evident in Israel, and North Korea has even boasted of possessing such weapons. Now nothing that the US says on the subject of WMD is likely to convince anyone."

In a battle for hearts and minds convincing others may not be that easy. Even weeks after the military campaign in Iraq is over the war of words has still not ended. They may have changed their slogans but the essence of their speeches has not changed.

Having joined the ranks of the anti-war protestors Adeel proudly displays his college shirt with slogans that read ‘No war’ and ‘No blood for oil’ in red ink. “We--a bunch of friends--joined the protest march and it was great fun,” and then he sobers up to add, “Of course we wanted to show our support for the Iraqi people. I feel they had been already suffering badly under Saddam’s rule and all those years of sanctions. The war must have made things really worse. I am sure diplomatic solutions could have been found but America seemed hell bent on war. Personally I feel they are just after Iraq’s oil.”

For many who did not take to the streets in protest, there was another front closer to home: the Internet. It provided a forum where they could exchange views, participate in discussion groups on the Iraq war and learn more about the latest events. Though some of the discussions did tend to lose focus, ending in US bashing, they had their share of humor (‘OIL for Operation Iraqi Liberation’) and sarcasm (‘I don’t know why hostile Iraqi reception of troops is surprising many US soldiers. I’d be really polite to people who bomb civilians, raid houses, point guns at me and shout at me in a foreign language, wouldn’t you?’). But the seriousness and resourcefulness of most arguments was impressive. The reason for the war seemed a very popular topic of discussion. Saddam was no doubt a ‘brutal dictator’ but this war was not about him or his regime --‘he was just the CIA’s bogey man.’ It wasn’t about WMD--‘deterrence could have worked against those and besides he was too power hungry to share it with terrorists who might even use it on him.' It wasn’t about avenging the gassing of Kurds in 1988--‘not one of the coalition forces had flinched a muscle to protest back then.' It wasn’t about biochemical weapons--‘Iraq is too far off to launch such an attack on American soil.' It wasn’t about liberating the Iraqi people--‘Why don’t they support the Palestinian and Kashmiri freedom fighters who are fighting for freedom and the right of self determination?’ To many it was part of a more sinister ‘new world order--to rearrange the map of the Middle East and secure Iraq’s oil fields.' ‘Oil’, ‘Israel’ and ‘the entrenchment of US power’ (as if any more entrenchment were needed) were for many the ‘hidden agenda’ for the war.

“This is all a media war,” says Nosheen, a third year student at Lahore College. In the Internet café she shows the e-mails she has just received: articles on the Iraq war and pictures of civilian casualties. “It’s these pictures that the Americans can’t hide. At first I thought well maybe America means good and it wouldn’t be so bad after all, what with Saddam gone and democracy in Iraq and so on. But now I don’t believe a word they say. It’s a massacre. Do they want to exterminate Muslims?”

Now she and her friends have joined the campaign of boycotting American products. “If they think they can refuel their economy with Iraq’s oil, then we should bring down their economy. It’s this money that they used to build those cruise missiles that rained on Baghdad. Who knows who they might use them against next—Syria, Iran, Pakistan?”

The outcome of the war has no doubt set off waves of despair, anger and frustration to build up in the Muslim world. The much-televised scenes of civilian casualties, humiliated Iraqi POWs, and triumphant American soldiers rolling through the streets of Baghdad, previously the capital of a vast Muslim empire, have left a bitter taste in the mouths of millions. The anti-West camp has become more adamant in its attitude, and even some of the supporters of the US’ so-called War on Terror have been alienated.

Khalid, a bearded young man in flowing white kameez and ankle-high shalwar (who insists he does not belong to any religious political party) says he had personally condemned the Sept. 11 attacks. But now he feels differently. “After all they have done in Afghanistan and Iraq, if today something like that attack happens again in the USA it would seem justified. They can’t use 9/11 as an excuse to keep killing Muslims everywhere.”

But Najma, a history teacher at a well-reputed private school says we should avoid the urge to label this war as a ‘crusade against Muslims’ and points to the anti-war rallies in many western countries including France, Italy, Rome, the USA and the UK. Instead, she says we should admit our own shortcomings. “Even with his impoverished army Saddam might have stood a fraction of a chance had the Arab nations, particularly Kuwait, Qatar, Oman and Jordan not literally stabbed him in the back by allowing air, land and sea routes to coalition forces. And why didn’t the Arab League warn Qatar and Kuwait--the same way the European Union warned Turkey that any involvement of Turkish troops in Kurdistan would jeopardize its EU membership--against their undignified involvement in the war on Iraq? Why did Jordan allow itself to be pressured to expel Iraqi diplomats in the midst of it all? In the end I guess we just have ourselves to blame.”

She admits that it is often hard to answer students' questions on the war without becoming politicized—why did the US attack Iraq without UN support? Why don’t the Islamic countries help Iraq? “Students often have very strong views about the war themselves, possibly echoing those of their parents or backed by some piece of information they had read on the Internet or heard on TV. It just amazes me how much interest children show in collecting information about this topic whereas most other history lessons don’t seem to interest them at all.”

The Iraq war has no doubt been a subject of popular debate lately. The huge anti-war protests of recent months and the popular opposition to the war, both in and outside the US, have given new life to the meaning of world conscience. They have created new ties between Muslims and mainstream communities in Europe and eased the Muslims’ sense of alienation. Despite language, cultural, religious and ideological barriers, people did come together and found they shared a huge common ground.

“For once I actually seemed to agree with the religious leaders on something without feeling like an Islamic fundamentalist myself,” says Mohsin.

Khalid, however, has his own fixed perceptions about the war. He insists that all those anti-war protests in Europe and the US prove nothing beyond the fact that they are a free and democratic people who can voice their opinions. “But their governments have their own vested interests in Iraq, and the people can just protest against their decisions. This war doesn’t affect them as it affects us. When we are bombed and killed in our own lands, they’d still be protesting over our graves, but then that won’t help us. This is our war and no one else shall fight it for us. The sooner we Muslims realize this and unite together, the better for us all. Then probably someday we might be able to say ‘THANK YOU MR. BUSH--for waking us up!’”

But no one is likely to convince him that Mr. Bush’s war on Iraq can ever be justified. No thank you to Mr. Bush for waging the war.