Turkey and The US War On Iraq
An Interview
by Noam Chomsky
April 03, 2003
1.Turkey is being bitterly criticized in the US for failing to allow
U.S. combat troops to use Turkey as a launching pad to open a second front
in northern Iraq. There are indeed some who say US and British soldiers
are dying in higher numbers because of Turkey. How would you respond to
such claims and how would you evaluate Turkey's stand so far. Was it an
accidental no in the parliament or did it reflect a coming of age of Turkish
democracy.
The criticism of Turkey in the US is indeed bitter, and extremely revealing.
The Turkish government took the position of over 90 percent of the population.
That reveals that the government lacks "democratic credentials,"
according to former Ambassador Morris Abramowitz, now a distinguished
elder statesman. The government is "following the people," he
wrote, instead of following orders from Washington and Crawford Texas.
That is plainly unacceptable. The view he articulates is standard.
Turkey taught the US a lesson in democracy. That is regarded as criminal.
One can debate the reasons and the background, but the facts are glaringly
obvious, underscored even more dramatically by the reaction in the US
to similar crimes elsewhere. Germany and France are bitterly condemned
for the same reason, while Italy, Spain, Hungary and others are praised
as the "New Europe," because their leaders agreed to follow
US orders in opposition to the vast majority of the population, almost
as much as in Turkey.
I do not recall ever having seen such demonstration of intense hatred
for democracy on the part of elite opinion in the US (and to some extent
Britain).
2. You have long argued that it was the basic decency of the American
people and not body bags that helped end the war in Vietnam. What will
it take to end this war ? What is driving continued support for President
Bush ?
Public mood is in the US is complicated. It's important to bear in mind
that last September a huge government-media propaganda campaign was put
into operation, which left the US population on another planet as far
as Iraq is concerned. Iraq's neighbors, and most of the rest of the world,
rightly despise Saddam Hussein. But they do not fear him. In the US, and
the US alone, the majority of the population -- since September 2002 --
regards Iraq as an imminent threat to US security. That was basically
the wording of the October 2002 congressional resolution authorizing the
US of force. After the September 11 attacks, virtually no one regarded
Iraq as responsible. By December 2002 the figure had risen to almost half
the population. By now it seems that a considerable majority not only
attribute the terrorist attacks to Iraq and believe that Iraqis were on
the planes that destroyed the World Trade Center, but also believe that
Saddam Hussein will soon carry out more such attacks unless he is stopped.
Take away the fear factor, and the US is probably much like the rest of
the world with regard to the war in Iraq: overwhelming opposition.
In the case of Vietnam, it took years before the public turned against
the war -- on principled grounds, unlike educated elites and the business
world, who finally came to oppose the war too but on "pragmatic grounds":
it was becoming too costly to the US. The situation is far better now,
because of the civilizing effect of the popular movements of the past
40 years. But it remains difficult.
3. Is this war truly the turning point in the way international relations
are conducted ? Are the Bushies really trying to reshape the world and
what impact will its outcome, whatever you predict it to be, have on Israeli
and the Palestinian question.
They have proclaimed very explicitly, in the National Security Strategy
of September 2002, that they intend to control the world by force and
to prevent any potential challenge to their domination. It is reasonable
to assume that part of the motivation for the attack on Iraq is to establish
the principle of "preventive war," enunciated in the Security
Strategy, as a norm that can be followed elsewhere. The plans have aroused
enormous fear and opposition worldwide, and among the foreign policy elite
at home. True, some approve it. Among them are the ultra-right and large
sectors of Christian fundamentalist movements in the US, and others as
well. Osama bin Laden, if he is still alive, must be delighted: the outcome
surpasses his wildest dreams. Within a year, Bush and his associates have
succeeded in becoming the most feared and hated political leadership in
the world, as international opinion studies reveal very clearly. If they
are allowed to persist in their plans, the future looks ominous..
For the Palestinians, the results are an unmitigated disaster. Bush and
Powell speak of their "vision," but are careful never to describe
what it is. That we can ascertain from their actions in support of their
most favored client, the official "man of peace," Ariel Sharon.
Bush and Powell are now even on record as stating that Israel can continue
to expand settlements in the occupied territories until some unspecified
future when the US government will decide that the Palestinians are making
"progress."
Two-thirds of the US population support the long-standing international
consensus in favor of a two-state settlement on the internationally-recognized
(pre-June 1967) borders, with minor and mutual adjustments. The US government
has barred that outcome for 25 years, and still does. The facts, though
uncontroversial, are scarcely known in the US. The Bush administration
has gone even beyond its predecessors in this regard. Apart from vague
talk about "visions" and "dreams," there is nothing
to indicate that these commitments have changed, unfortunately. Again,
there is a lot of work to do
|
