The art of standing nowhere in the war on Iraq

As an Iraqi citizen, I feel sad. Not because war is ravaging my country.

I'm upset at the seemingly endless state of backwardness that this part of the world is living in. Who is responsible for all the civilians killed in the war on Iraq? Is it the United States alone? I don't think so. A war needs two parties, and obviously, what is being described as resolute resistance, is actually defense of a regime that has got us where we are so far.

Even worse, the war is prompting further fundamentalism and agitating chauvinistic and radical feelings at the expense of humanism. I am speechless. I do not sympathize with those defending what they call a country. What is a country? Let's define it.

Is Iraq only a land with people living on it? In fact, for the past three decades, some Arab rulers have been treating their countries like their private farms: abusing its resources and enslaving its people. Of course all is done on behalf of the welfare of the nation, be it Arab or Muslim. Development, welfare, institutions and democracy are what make a country, to name but a few of the components of a state. If our countries had these elements, I would be the first to die defending what we have.

Apparently, I do not see anything to defend. Does anyone see a point behind defending the sectarianism, fundamentalism, oppression, tyranny, backwardness, tribalism and poverty we are living in?

Inasmuch as I'm opposed to the killing of civilians in any part of the world and I'm provoked by the American administration's arrogance and backstage deals drafted in the corridors of Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) by "princes of the darkness" such as Richard Perle and Jay Garner, I fully subscribe to the American "remodeling of the Middle East."

Needless to say, I don't buy all the American crap about freedom. Of course we agree about the necessity of democracy, but disagree about the recipes of the World Trade Organization and the International Monetary Fund.

We have to prioritize the evils facing us. A smart invader is better than a foolish ruler. At least, the invader might give me a chance to overtly voice my opposition to its existence, the ruler never did.

Our house needs renovation. We cannot do it. Let others do. Says who the peoples should always be the masters of their fate. Who liberated France from German occupation? Who funded the American battle for independence? Who gave Lebanon its independence? The answers for those of you who do not know are respectively: America, France, and Britain.

And as long as we are listing our "freedom" shopping list, why restrict it to regimes? Try MPs, ministers and presidents of unions. Do you know that the President of the Journalists Union has been president for the past four decades? Forget about tyrant rulers. Have you ever heard of ministers inheriting their fathers? Of MPs inheriting their grandfathers name, political party and parliamentary seat? Of the "democratic" president of a "Cultural Council" who has been president for the past half century?

What is the difference between America controlling oil fields and Gulf princes monopolizing oil revenue? Nothing. What is the difference between foreign invasion and domestic oppression? Stop justifying domestic tyranny claiming that "we should be the masters of our own fate." Oppression, like justice, does not have a national identity. Nations and civilizations do not clash, interests do. But they do it under the banner of religion, ethnicity and national identity.

Let the Americans rid us of our problems. Once they do that, we will never let them sleep in comfort. Am I talking about resistance or violence? Of course, I'm not. I am talking about upgrading our political practice and then coming down heavily on multinational corporations and abuse of earth resources. Only then we can start lobbying for a more human and welfare universal state.

Ahmed Bayyati is a student of law at the Lebanese University. He wrote this commentary for Alternative