I’m going to post a longer post (or possibly a series of them) later on the Israel-Gaza violence, but meanwhile this caught my eye:
Of the various premises on which the U.S. invasion of Iraq was sold to the American people, one of the most bizarre was that a post-Saddam Iraqi government would be friendly to Israel. As with claims about WMD and Al Qaeda connections, this one has proved to be a work of imagination.
Just as they did during Israel’s 2006 war against Hezbollah, Iraq’s leaders are now showing where their true sympathies lie. Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s Da’wa Party “issued a statement condemning the attacks and calling on Islamic countries to cut relations with Israel and end all ’secret and public talks’ with it.”
Khalid Hussain of the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) told Gulf News “We have obligations towards Palestine and all Iraqi people are in solidarity with the people in Palestine, and we will support the people in Gaza.”
Indeed it was rather stupid and naive for US policymakers to have believed that a democratic Iraq would automatically be pro-Israel; this sort of stupidity can best be explained that the policymakers gained high office because of their ideological purity rather than because of any intelligence or detachment on their part.
But it is a bit ironically amusing that AIPAC supported the invasion of Iraq because they thought it would help Israel. Here’s a scenario: assume Iraq gets back on its feet, politically and economically, while retaining the trappings of democracy. The democratic Iraq decides (maybe through a referendum) to gain nuclear weapons while other states in the region (naming no names, of course) have them. What’s the betting that in that scenario AIPAC and the American right-wing idiots will suddenly lose all support for democracy in Iraq (no doubt asserting that all along they had never believed it was properly democratic) and call for Maliki to be deposed in favour of a dictator?
(via Matthew Yglesias)