That other war
"The Hurt Locker" and the war we prefer to ignore
That other war
Dick Polman, Inquirer National Political Columnist
Now that The Hurt Locker has been awarded the Oscar for Best Picture (my choice as well), perhaps we'll start to see news stories studded with cinematic metaphors. So let's get it over with:
The bomb clock is ticking on President Obama's health care plan...The Democrats could cut the wrong wires and blow themselves up...Like bomb specialists hooked on danger, the two congressional parties may be incapable of defusing the tension...
On the other hand, the year's most spellbinding movie has not exactly embedded itself in the popular culture; to date, its domestic box office take is roughly $13 million, a vivid testament to the public's ongoing aversion to watching Iraq on the big screen. The reason for this de facto boycott is no mystery. The war is a downer and most Americans tuned it out years ago, back when George W. Bush was trying in vain to defend his ill-considered invasion and his incompetent occupation.
But, at the risk of readers tuning out at the end of this sentence, it's worth noting the latest political developments in Iraq. The Hurt Locker garnered its six Oscars on the same weekend that Iraq staged a national election, its first since 2005. The bad news is that at least 38 people died and 80 were wounded in suicide bombings that were intended to intimidate the voters. The good news - maybe, conceivably - is that the usual quarreling sectarian factions might cobble together some kind of peaceful governing coalition in the weeks ahead, thereby allowing America to proceed with its long-planned combat troop withdrawals late in the summer.
The Obama administration would dearly love for this to happen, given its focus these days on Pakistan and Afghanistan, not to mention the various crises closer to home. And most Americans would love for this to happen, given their presumably instinctive desire to purge Iraq from their minds and return to the bygone days when they couldn't find it on a map.
But Iraq won't be going away any time soon. Bush's grand democratic experiment is still an exceedingly fragile construct. Three hundred civilians reportedly die each month in political violence; as one news report puts it, "Assassination is still the most likely cause of death in Iraqi politics." A European watchdog group, Transparency International, ranks Iraq as the fourth most corrupt country in the world. Warring political parties control the various government ministries - at least those ministries that are still standing, because car bombs have destroyed five of them during the past six months. Even the most basic services - a car license plate, for instance - are obtainable only if one is prepared to pay a bribe.
Only 25 percent of Iraqis can get enough electricity for their basic needs. Only 25 percent have access to basic health care. Twenty two percent are malnourished. Forty seven percent are unemployed or underemployed. When measuring average income per head of household, Iraq ranks 162nd in the world. Its business climate ranks 153rd; indeed, despite the Bush administration's dream of creating a private enterprise paradise, 60 percent of the Iraqi jobs are in the public sector.
The vote tallies from the weekend election have yet to be announced, but it's clear that none of the 80 political parties have won anything close to a majority. Apparently the current prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, and a former prime minister, Ayad Allawi, control the most popular factions. They're likely to spend many weeks, and possibly months, trying to form a governing coalition - presumably, one that would unite or at least pacify the majority Shiites, the minority Sunnis, and the Kurds who have long wanted autonomy in northern Iraq. The longer the negotiations take, the greater the risk of a power vacuum, and the greater the risk of renewed violence.
A new report in The Economist magazine concludes: "The city (of Baghdad) is more militarized than it was under Saddam Hussein...Though Iraqis are fed up with violence, the militia-leaders-cum-party-barons pay no more than lip service to the idea of reconciliation...There is a real risk that Iraq's democratic institutions will not survive. They are too weak and too corrupted to resolve the country's many problems peacefully and credibly. Ambitious politicians are able to go outside the institutional framework to further their partisan aims...Such instability opens the door once again to the militias. They appear to offer a shortcut to success, especially in the aftermath of the election. With their political masters locked in fractious coalition negotiations that may last for several months, (the militias) could be called on to carry out attacks aimed at influencing the division of power...
"America's influence is ebbing noticeably as its troops withdraw. Despite spending $800 billion over the past seven years, its plan for the country has still not worked."
Kathryn Bigelow, the director of The Hurt Locker, gave a shout out to the troops on Oscar night, in the hope that they all return safely from Iraq. They won't. Even if the Obama team hews to its Sept. 1 troop pullout timetable, roughly 50,000 will remain - and, as Joe Biden put it the other day, most of those who stay behind will still be guys who can shoot straight and go get bad guys."
We might be able to tune out the Oscar-winning movie, and even wipe the war from our minds, but we will continue to pay in blood and treasure. The final bill for our '03 folly is still years away.
Comment removed.
Don't be such a downer about Iraq Mr. Polman. It is on the verge of becoming a great success story for America and GWB. Remember Mr. Polan, it is okay if America wins & does a good thing:) this from David Frum dem politcal adviser. ***Iraq's elected government has consolidated power over the whole country, including the formerly Iranian-run southern city of Basra. It has presided over a remarkable decline in violence. The Brookings Institute's Iraq index estimates that there were 34,500 Iraqi civilian casualties in 2006. In 2009, 2,800 Iraqi civilians died violently. Attacks on coalition forces have dwindled from almost 2,000 per week at the end of 2006 to a little over 100 per week. Iraq is not yet a stable place -- but a future of stability seems at last at hand. Maybe the surest sign of success is that those who once opposed the surge are now scrambling to grab credit for it. Iraq "could be one of the great achievements of this administration," boasted Vice President Joe Biden to CNN's Larry King last month. Next we'll hear how we owe the Marshall Plan and the Panama Canal to the Obama administration. Well, that's not how those who were there remember it. A stable Western-oriented Iraq at peace with itself and its neighbors would be a great prize.*** http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/03/08/frum.iraq.election/index.html?hpt=T2— NEPhilly- If what we have done in/to Iraq— yoda
- If what we have done in/to Iraq is how you guys define success, I would hate to see what you would call failure.— yoda
- Comment removed.
- News flash to Dick: it is Obama's war now and has been for 16 months.— CD75
keep plugging away, DP. One of your dire predictions about Iraq will pam out someday.— jmc- Funny how the Angry Left is actually rooting against success in Iraq. What sick people. The Angry left is actually mad that the elections worked and 65% of the Iraqi people voted.— Comrade Noodlehead
- As to Dick's gloom and doom and the sky is falling rants on Iraq, remember Dick is the same person who said just a short time ago that the Repub party was just a regional party of the south.— CD75
- Polman... I know you were annoyed that Hurt Locker beat Avatar, a movie with more liberal messages than I could imagine. And I know you didn't like hearing that shoutout to the troops. Bring them home so we can spend the money on this socialist Health Care Bill. Well Dick you can't have good days all the time.— Phil Checchia
- I liked Hurt Locker, but I agree that it was overrated. I can see that Iraq has improved, but I certainly don't regard it as a success. I don't understand how some can reflect on the decision to invade Iraq right now and think it was a good decision - unless of course you disregard the death, suffering and the monetary cost to reach this point. jmc: The Economist is liberal?— p-diddy
- As I posted earlier, if Saddam Hussein were alive and in power right now he would be a story on page 8.— p-diddy
- 60% of Iraqi jobs are in the public sector? Why hasn't the private sector rushed in to save the day?— p-diddy
- Pdiddy- Perhaps a little trip down memory lane and you can see the horror that was the Sadaam regime............... http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/iraq_mass_graves.pdf
- I'll define sickness: Using 9/ll and non-existent WMD as a pretense to invade a country. The invasion plan was long a pipe dream of a group of arm chair warriors who advocate a muscular foreign policy that puts the interest of Israel first. Remember, and they'll admit it, that there's no amount of blood that is too much to spill for their goal. Also note that none of the blood is theirs or their children's. The key was finding a president who was either foolish or scared enough, a compliant and frighted public and a gutless opposition party to go along with their goofiness. I'm angry that thousands of Americans were killed because we dropped them in the middle of civil war. So the sick people are the warmongers, such as Dick Cheney, who hid behind his wife and child when it was his turn to answer the call in Vietnam. Yet he loves the macho talk. I don't know anyone who is rooting against success in Iraq. It better succeed because thanks to some awful decisions, we're stuck with it. A wise man said about Iraq: You broke it you bought it.— Rabe56
Cited by the Columbia Journalism Review as one of the nation's top political reporters, and lauded by the ABC News political website as "one of the finest political journalists of his generation," Dick Polman is a national political columnist at the Philadelphia Inquirer. He is on the full-time faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, as "writer in residence." Dick has been a frequent guest on C-Span, MSNBC, CNN, NPR and the BBC. He covered the 1992, 1996, 2000, and 2004 presidential campaigns.
ARCHIVES
All commentaries posted before April 18, 2008, can be accessed at www.dickpolman.blogspot.com.
- American Spectator
- David Limbaugh
- Free Republic
- Glenn Reynolds
- Hugh Hewitt
- Human Events
- John Hawkins
- Matt Lewis
- Michelle Malkin
- National Review
- Opinion Journal
- Power Line
- Red State
- The Brody File
- The Daily Caller
- Town Hall
- Weekly Standard
- Center for American Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- Daily Kos
- David Corn
- Huffington Post
- Media Matters
- Mojoblog (Mother Jones)
- Open Left
- Political Animal
- Salon's War Room
- Talking Points Memo
- Tapped
- The Democratic Strategist
- The Grey Matter
- Unclaimed Territory
- Andrew Sullivan
- Attytood
- Chi Tribune's The Swamp
- CJR's Campaign Desk
- CNN's Political Ticker
- CQ Politics
- FactCheck.org
- Gail Collins
- Howard Kurtz
- Mickey Kaus
- NBC's First Read
- Obit
- Political Wire
- Politico
- Politics Daily
- Pollster.com
- Real Clear Politics
- The Atlantic Wire
- The Fix
- The Moderate Voice
- The Plank
- USA Today On Politics
- Wonkette
