A Pilgrim’s Digression

The Times is reporting today that according to officials, the new Viceroy of Iraq, Paul Bremer, is going to authorize military personnel to shoot looters on sight:

Asked what this meant, the official replied, “They are going to start shooting a few looters so that the word gets around” that assaults on property, the hijacking of automobiles and violent crimes will be dealt with using deadly force.

New Policy in Iraq to Authorize G.I.’s to Shoot Looters

Seems like a rather risky policy to me, but then again, this whole empirical enterprise has been risky. For one thing, we cringe at any hint that we have effectively made Iraq a colony of the United States. Not only that, but we try our best not to act like a colonial power, which seems to mean staying out of sight, holed up in heavily guarded former Hussein palaces and taking very little obvious action to control a country on a fast slide into anarchy. I do think that now that we are in this mess, we need to stop euphemizing the affair and call it for what it is: a move towards a liberal democratic empire. That means we have to start acting like a colonial power, taking lessons from the British–hopefully the right lessons and not the wrong ones–and bringing some sort of authority to a country lacking in any centralized control.

Man, we are doing a fucked up job of ruling Iraq. I can hardly stand to listen to the Bushies anymore talk about “democratizing” Iraq. Democratizing? The people just want electricity so their air conditioners will work, for God’s sake. Democracy can wait. And now we have to start shooting looters. Well, we wouldn’t have to go that route if that ass Rumsfeld had thought to have platoons of MPs standing by for deployment into Iraq in the wake of the first wave of combat troops. Rumsfeld’s comment the other day, in his typical asinine, boldly understated fashion, was that bringing peace to Iraq has proven to be “untidy.” Untidy! As if Rumsfeld were having difficulty persuading his thirteen year-old daughter to clean her room! “Untidy” is a word useful for describing someone’s hair in the morning, or the house of someone with a gaggle of kids running around. “Untidy” is not an appropriate word to describe the situation in a country in which you are about to introduce totalitarian measures such as summary executions of looters and thieves.

It’s almost physically painful to read about how we are floundering in our efforts to keep the Iraqi situation from getting worse. Why don’t they have electricity yet? Why is no one collecting the garbage? I read yesterday that General Garner, the bum Bush has recently replaced with the civilian, Bremer, has said that the administration did not expect such a total breakdown in infrastructure. The people in charge expected that Iraqis would pretty much take charge of things themselves and keep basic services, like trash collection, going. Well you know what? That was just a really stupid assumption. Why would anyone keep working at their job when there is no expectation of getting paid? The soldiers on the ground in Iraq are complaining, too. There are far too few of them to police a country the size of California. I can imagine that just about now, when the heat is getting oppressive and the Iraqis are getting beliggerant, the typical American soldier is wishing he were about as far from Iraq as possible. American soldiers shooting looters, or killing civilians in crowds among which agent provacateurs may (or may not) have been mingling–this is all reminiscent of an earlier empire where the officers wore ostrich plumes on their helmets. England and France: India, Algeria, Africa, America. America: The Phillipines, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, the American West … now Iraq. Only no one will admit it. Oh no. America is no empire. Never. We have no experience whatsoever in empire (which is part of the problem). Actually, the problem is not that we lack experience at empire, but that we deny our history, and thus refuse to learn from it. We are the empire that dare not speak its name.