Iraqi people, U.S. troops
Both want end to occupation
By
LeiLani Dowell
Published Mar 12, 2006 9:12 PM
Three separate polls, two taken in Iraq and
one in the United States, show that the majority of the people in both countries
are opposed to the occupation of Iraq—including those troops sent to
occupy it.
A poll released on Feb. 28 by Le Moyne College/Zogby shows that
a great majority of U.S. troops stationed in Iraq—72
percent—“think the U.S. should exit Iraq in the next 12
months.” Of those, 29 percent said the U.S. should leave
“immediately.”
The poll also revealed the confusion of many of
the troops stationed in Iraq about the purpose of the war. Forty-two percent
said the U.S. mission “is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that
they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure.” Eighty-five
percent said that the U.S. mission is primarily “to retaliate for
Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks.”
Despite all the propaganda
to the contrary, however, only 24 percent believed that “establishing a
democracy that can be a model for the Arab World” was a major reason for
the war. Three-quarters of the troops polled had served multiple tours in Iraq,
according to a press release from Zogby International.
Meanwhile, the
newest Washington Post-ABC News poll of people living in the United States says
that over half of those polled—52 percent—believe that the U.S.
should begin withdrawing forces. Accord ing to the Washington Post, “The
poll found that 56 percent also say the United States is not making significant
progress toward restoring civil order in Iraq.” Furthermore, 48 percent
said the U.S. and its allies are failing to move ahead in “establishing a
democratic government.”
Perhaps the most insightful poll was
released on Jan. 31 by the Program on International Policy Attitudes. Entitled
“What the Iraqi Public Wants,” the poll divided the Iraqi population
into Kurds, Shia and Sunnis, and shows that 80 percent of all Iraqis polled
believe that the “U.S. government plans to have permanent military bases
in Iraq.” Seventy-six percent believed that the U.S. would refuse
“if the new Iraqi government were to tell the U.S. to withdraw all of its
forces within six months.” Eighty-seven percent would approve the
government’s endorsing a timeline for U.S. withdrawal, as opposed to only
reducing the forces “as the security situation improves.” Almost
half of those polled—47 percent—said they approve of attacks on
U.S.-led forces in Iraq.
According to the report, “The major source
of urgency for withdrawal is the feeling ... that it is offensive for their
country to be occupied. A secondary reason is that U.S. forces attract more
attacks and make the violence worse. The majority of those polled expect that
should the U.S. withdraw in six months, the day-to-day security of ordinary
citizens, willingness of factions in parliament to cooperate, and availability
of public services would increase; while violent attacks, inter-ethnic violence,
the amount of crime, and the presence of ‘foreign fighters’ would
all decrease.”
The report also states that “a majority or
plurality says the U.S. is doing a poor job” in all areas of nonmilitary
involvement—assisting with economic development, assisting with the oil
industry, training Iraqi security forces, helping to build Iraqi government
institutions, helping to mediate between ethnic groups, infrastruc ture, and
helping Iraqis organize their communities to address needs. “Of the seven
nonmilitary activities Iraqis were asked about,” the report asserts,
“approval is ... lowest for U.S. efforts to help mediate between ethnic
groups (65 percent overall).”
These numbers come amid intense
fighting throughout Iraq, with 15 killed on March 6, including a puppet Iraqi
major-general and one U.S. soldier whose death brought the official U.S. troop
toll to 2,300. In addition, a report from Amnesty International states that
torture of detain ees in Iraq is still routinely occurring, despite promises to
the contrary in the wake of the Abu Ghraib scandal. AI says that 14,000
detainees are being held in coalition military prisons; last year, the U.S. said
it plans to expand prison capacity to 16,000, at an expense of $50
million.
On March 6, the radio show Democracy Now! interviewed two Iraqi
women who had traveled to New York to speak out about the situation in Iraq. One
of them, civil engineer and blogger Faiza Al-Araji, described the propagation of
“civil war” in Iraq, amidst the explosion of recent fighting:
“Somebody is pushing the country to ... the option of civil war. Why? Who
is the benefit? Iraqis are against civil war.
“If you have the
chance to go ... in the streets of Iraqis and ask everyone, ‘Are you with
the civil war?’ they will say, ‘No.’ ... If you have [an]
official meeting with the leaders of religion and political parties and social
parties ... they will say, ‘No.’ So the question is: Who is pushing
the country to choose civil war? ...
“The only one who will benefit
from this civil war is the occupation force, because it will give them the
justification to stay forever in Iraq. They are building army bases to stay in
Iraq. So, we have no other explanation.”
When interviewer Amy
Goodman asked Al-Araji if she was Sunni or Shia, she replied, “I
don’t like this question. I’m Iraqi. And I’m insisting I am
Iraqi. I don’t want to use these new titles [that] have ... entered Iraq
after [occupation head Paul] Bremer. When he entered Iraq he made this division
of the Iraqi people. And we refuse it. ...
“We are brothers and
sisters. We are Muslim .... This is the identity of the nation.... But they are
trying to divide the people, to go to the sub-identity, to make a cause of
fighting or to provoke the people against each other. And we refuse
it.”
Medea Benjamin of Code Pink, which is organizing the U.S. tour
of the Iraqi women, reported that the U.S. State Department denied visas to two
other women invited on the delegation and gave as a reason that these women had
no family ties in Iraq and might stay in the U.S. They lack family ties because
in both cases their entire families had been killed when U.S. tanks fired into
the civilian cars in which they were driving.
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email:
ww@workers.org
Subscribe
wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news
DONATE