[lbo-talk] "Apache freedom, Apache democracy, and an Apache regime"

[Doug Henwood]

Stephen E Philion quoted the NYT:

>More than anything else, Falluja has become a galvanizing battle, a
>symbol around which many Iraqis rally their anticolonial sentiments.
>Some say the fighting there exposes the lie of American justice by
>showing that the world's sole superpower is ready to avenge the
>killings and mutilation of four American security contractors by
>sending marines to shell and invade a city of 300,000 people.

Financial Times - April 22, 2004

MIDDLE EAST & AFRICA: US handling of Israel and Iraq stokes anger in Arab world
By Roula Khalaf
Financial Times; Apr 22, 2004

As the cameras lingered on the bloodied body of Abdel Aziz Rantissi, 
leader of the radical Palestinian Hamas group, Arab officials and 
commentators lined up on satellite television to denounce Israel's 
weekend assassination and accuse the US of having authorised the 
killing.

But the chorus of indignation did not stop in the Gaza Strip, where 
Rantissi was hunted down. Those interviewed moved on to rail against 
the Bush administration's policies in Iraq. Islamists pledged that 
the resistance to occupation in both Iraq and Palestine would prevail 
and destroy the American-Israeli axis.

After weeks of the most violent unrest in Iraq and dramatic American 
concessions to Israel, the Middle East's two crises seem to be 
merging in the minds of many Arabs.

Reacting to the troubles in Iraq, the United Arab Emirates' 
al-Khaleej newspaper claimed earlier this month that a new Israel was 
emerging at the very heart of the Arab world.

"Apache freedom, Apache democracy, and an Apache regime" are all that 
the Bush administration has given Iraq so far, said al-Khaleej, 
referring to the US attack helicopter of the same name. It accused 
the US president of "a literal emulation of the same Apache methods" 
used by Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

The growing perceptions of a co-ordinated American-Israeli policy to 
force an Arab capitulation, particularly with regard to the 
Palestinian cause, damage further America's already troubled image in 
the region.

Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president, told French daily Le Monde on 
Tuesday that Arabs had never harboured as much hatred towards the US.

The sense among Arabs that the region is fighting the same war on two 
fronts also complicates the Bush administration's relations with Arab 
allies and its attempts to market its "Greater Middle East 
initiative", a policy of social and political reforms that has 
already aroused suspicions among the region's governments and public 
opinion.

US officials complain that Arab media have fed the confusion between 
Iraq and Palestine, particularly in promotional clips that alternate 
between pictures of Palestinians and Iraqis.

"There's also a big explosion in both places. It makes it easier for 
our critics and more difficult for us. But you cannot compare the 
two," says a US official. "Iraq is a limited occupation and it's in a 
political transition to sovereignty. The Israeli occupation is a 
conflict where the dispute is over land."

But the linkage between the two crises is partly created by the Iraqi 
insurgents.

When four American contractors were killed and mutilated in Falluja, 
responsibility was claimed by a previously unknown group calling 
itself the "Brigades of Martyr Ahmed Yassin" - the spiritual leader 
of the Palestinian Hamas who was killed last month in an Israeli air 
strike in Gaza.

"This is a gift from the people of Falluja to the people of 
Palestine," said the group in a statement.

Meanwhile, Moqtada al-Sadr, the Shia cleric who turned violently 
against the US this month, has described himself as part of the "real 
Islamic unity" created by Lebanon's Hizbollah and the Palestinian 
Hamas.

"I want them to accept me as their striking arm in Iraq, as necessity 
and opportunity dictate," he declared this month.

The problem for the US, moreover, is that the actions of American 
forces and the images they create are stronger than the political 
differences between the two occupations.

The US lashed out at Al-Jazeera, the Qatar based satellite 
broadcaster, accusing it of outright lies in its reporting from 
Falluja. But the US allies on the Iraqi Governing Council and 
witnesses have also described the battles in Falluja as collective 
punishment.

Last week's US decision to give a more prominent role to the UN in 
Iraq and the announcement by Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN envoy, of the 
structure of the sovereign government that will take over on June 30, 
should have been welcomed by the Arab world. But these moves were 
overshadowed by Mr Bush's press conference with Ariel Sharon.

In a dramatic policy shift that infuriated the Arab world, Mr Bush 
endorsed Israel's attempt to retain large West Bank settlements built 
on occupied Palestinian land as well as Israel's rejection of the 
right of return of Palestinian refugees to homes within the Jewish 
state. The US move led King Abdullah of Jordan to postpone a planned 
meeting with President George W. Bush this week.

In theory, the June 30 handover of sovereignty in Iraq should 
contribute to separating the two crises in the minds of Arabs. "To 
call it resistance to occupation in Iraq doesn't make sense - the 
occupation ends on June 30," says a US official.

The choice of Mr Brahimi, a former Algerian foreign minister, to plan 
the Iraqi transition could also shape a better image of the US 
presence in Baghdad.

But with continued, if not reinforced US troops in Iraq long beyond 
the transition date and still strong American influence on the way 
the country is governed, the US will find it difficult to convince 
the Arab world that the occupation has really ended.