What was Iraq like Under Saddam?
A new official report from the General Accounting Office (GAO)in the U.S. says that in some important respects, including access to electricity, life in Iraq is worse than it was under Saddam. The main reason is sabotage and other attacks by insurgents--whoever they are. But it could still be argued that the U.S. opened the floodgates, and has consistently failed to provide minimal security--especially after dark, and for women.
I'm still looking for a great article on what life was like in Iraq from about 1993 to 2003. Bush defenders like to say Saddam killed hundreds of thousands of people--perhaps 799,000. I gather, however, that about half of that number results from two episodes: the gassing of Kurds in the 1980s (after which the U.S. government strengthened their support for Saddam), and the slaughter of Shiite rebels shortly after Gulf War I in 1991 (when Saddam was fighting for his life).
(UPDATE July 10: On the 1988 episode of gassing Kurdish civilians, and the strong possibility that it was actually the work of the Iranians--something Rumsfeld, for example, would know--see here).
The mass graves: when was the last time bodies were added to them? (See here).
Abu Ghreib (or whatever the spelling): what went on there from 1993 to 2003?
UNICEF circulated numbers about children suffering and dying under the UN sanctions--something like 2 million children malnourished, and 30,000 people per year (20,000 of them children) dying earlier than they otherwise would have. (See here and here). I've been trying to find a piece I seem to recall in which a conservative questioned these numbers. (In those days a criticism of continuing the sanctions was a criticism of the U.S.) There was a shortage of reasonably-priced food, and this affected the poor above all. For the rich, there was a great variety of food and other stuff available in Iraq. Precise numbers of suffering children?
On the other hand, there is obviously more cash in Iraq now, and a greater variety of food and consumer goods of all kinds--mostly in the black market, if that can even be distinguished from something more legal. But for many people, there is less security. Instead of a state which in principal was all-powerful, but in practice left many people alone, there is now private-sector kidnapping, extortion, rape and armed robbery.
As the U.S. turns over security to Iraqis--in practice, to militias--are they in many cases putting mullahs more in charge of people's lives than they were under Saddam? Does this impact women, in particular, and their ability, for example, to go to university? (See also here).
I think it has been a surprise to many people that so many Iraqis took part in looting, and now in violent insurrection, which makes it difficult for the U.S. or anyone to maintain the basic infrastructure of a country, including electricity. But it's still difficult to get a real picture of what is going on--or what it was like in the decade or so before March 2003.
UPDATE: I am constantly amazed at these recurring stories (link via Instapundit) to the effect that no one in Iraq was actually working on WMDs for Saddam, yet crucial people assured Saddam that this was taking place. They were apparently able to deceive him completely. No one paid taxes? Everyone had a gun? As I've said before, this doesn't sound like the regimes of Stalin or Hitler.
As I searched, I came across a story suggesting that admission to university was rigidly and corruptly controlled. Young men could be admitted if they agreed to marry the widow of a man who fought in the Iran-Iraq war. Shades of Aristophanes, and indeed of the ancient polis and strict (even harsh) citizen virtue. Oh, I almost forgot: very hard on the young men, of course. This isn't funny; I know that.
Final note: shorter version of that Fox news story on "intelligence failure": it's not Bush's fault--everyone was and/or is stupid and ignorant. Well, one can surely sympathize, yet somehow...this won't quite do.
|
