iran, the sadrist movement and american incompetence
by Matthew Kimball
Published: April 29, 2008
Americans are not known for their superb intellect of international issues. As a result, we’ve become somewhat polarized from the world around us. Our society doesn’t exactly extol diversity among culture and part of that can be blamed on our global hegemony, as well as a lethargic free press, that has ceased to live up to journalistic standards. Some Americans probably don’t know that there are large cities in Africa with shopping malls and residential areas. Some Americans probably don’t know about the enduring occupation of Palestinian land by Israel. Some Americans probably don’t know that we aide some of the largest and most repressive militaries in the world and suppress democracy at any chance we can get, like the democratically elected government in Iran that the CIA overthrew in 1953 and replaced with the brutal Shah dictatorship. So is it any surprise that a large majority of Americans are unaware of the double standards we have concerning Iran today?
In southern Iraq, Muqtada al-Sadr and his followers in the Mahdi army are vehemently opposed to the U.S. occupation. They have been fighting bloody engagements with Iraqi security forces and the U.S. military for several months now. This is where it gets a little tricky. The U.S.-backed government of Iraq is a Shiite entity and so is the Sadrist movement. However, the Sadrist movement is composed of a Shiite political party that is defiant against western presence. Iran has been accused by the United States of supplying the militant Sadrist movement with weapons and intelligence. Iran, like the U.S. backed Iraqi government and Muqtada al-Sadr and his followers, are Shiite. According to a April 24th Associated Press Article by Hamza Hendawi and Qassim Abdul-Zahra, “Iran has obvious and well known connections to the main Shiite political groups in al-Maliki’s government. During the recent battles in Basra, Iran supported al-Maliki’s crackdown on so-called ‘criminals’ but did not make a clear statement on the spillover confrontation with the Mahdi army.”
There seems to be a sense of duplicity on the American attitude towards Iran. It’s no secret that the Bush Administration wishes to engage Iran militarily. However, why would we invade a country that actually supports the Iraqi government we created and is even opposed to a militant Shiite group that is fervently anti-American? The two-facedness of this situation should be especially alarming to the American public. Yet in this seemingly sprawling technocracy, there has been hardly a blip on the radar. Why hasn’t the mass media in this country picked up on the double standards set forth by the Bush Administration? Are we really still wallowing in fear of being unpatriotic as if it were a mere month after September 11, 2001?
If anything, the biggest military threat in the world in terms of its resources is Israel. However, it wouldn’t make sense for us to invade Israel. They’re our Middle East puppet regime meant to intimidate and control the Arab world. To many, statements like this will be labeled as anti-Semitic and discriminatory, but that is just a cheap insult designed by radical right-wing political pundits to stray attention away from violations of human rights. So with our friendly neighbors the Israelis, we continue to make threats of military action against Iran and other members of the Arab world. The American populace has the power to question the contradictions present in our foreign policy, but what will it take to enable this kind of activism? One things for sure, it will not be American media outlets.
In order to conquer American ethnocentrism, individuals need to overcome convenience and rampant consumerism, both of which are desensitizing society. Consumerism and convenience are celebrated much more than individual thought and provocation of authority and social hierarchy. To overcome these social barriers, we must give up a great deal of luxury in our lifestyles. For instance, we must begin looking elsewhere for our news, besides television. There is an abundance underground and alternative news outlets that deserve a chance. Publications like The Nation, radio programs like Democracy Now! and foreign media outlets like Al Jazeera, are much more akin to truth and objectivity than anything on CNN and Fox news. We need to become citizens who hold our government accountable and we need to search for truth in less convenient ways.
—
(email this article or post to social network)
—
(6)
May 22nd, 2008 at 2:37 am
Wow! That’s the way to sell Socialism: “Check your luxuries at the door.” Thanks for being honest about that. However, I disagree with the idea that consumerism differs from individual thought. Consumerism is ALL about individual thought. The individual consumer chooses as opposed to the collective, or worse, the hierarchy. Sure there’s propaganda to sort through, but we still have choices. What’s the alternative you advocate?
And please don’t suggest that The Nation and Al Jazeera aren’t just as full of propaganda just because they play to your tune. Next you’ll be telling me that Michael Moore is a serious reporter.