In the American invasion of Iraq, the word “resistance” was forbidden

Shall we say thank you to Putin because, as a result of his invasion of Ukraine, he awakened the world, perhaps for a moment, to the tragedies that the NATO machine, led by America, one after the other, of invasion, occupation and regime change, as if history is repeating itself because it is repeating itself or perhaps because the world does not learn?

Is what is being circulated, now, with anger and pain similar to the pain of someone who received a heavy blow on the head, new? I mean the racist statements, from commentators and journalists, who see the invasion of Ukraine and the displacement of its people as an uncivilized position because the Ukrainians are not like the Iraqis, Afghans and the general population of the Middle East, because they are from the “us” race and not from that uncivilized race “them”? Because they are citizens of the first world and not from the third world?

Did racist comments float in moments of human affection for what is really happening in Ukraine, or is it persistent racism, like a virus that inhabits the body, that may fall into hibernation for a while, but quickly reappears with strength when the conditions are appropriate?

The roots of racism are alive despite its antiquity and the claims being marketed that it is on the verge of extinction. It suffices us to take one look at the world’s “civilized” position towards the Palestinian people, and how it provides the Zionist settler colonialists with billions of dollars a month to continue the extermination of the Palestinian people in the name of Israel’s right to exist and confront Palestinian terrorism, to realize that all that has happened, in recent decades, is giving racism names New and different packaging, he sells it in a “humane” way. Perhaps what we need now is to get acquainted with the "white", now naked face of racism - civilization, to return to the colonial era of Algeria and Africa, to look beyond the media surface that obscures vision, and to read the writings of the thinker Franz Fanon, who is known for his struggle for freedom and anti-colonialism and racism. It will also help us to remember (if we forget) the details of the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the same US-British coalition, which is currently lamenting the invasion of Ukraine.

I noticed while watching the live broadcast of what is happening in Ukraine, that Western channels tried to transmit several events at once by dividing the screen into four sections. One of them shows the extent of the devastation caused by the Russian bombing, the second is the flight of the population, with pictures of women and children in particular, and the third is the heroic statements of the Ukrainian president. The fourth is dedicated to young men and boys being trained in weapons under the heading of “resistance.” This weapons training, including the manufacture of Molotov cocktails, entitled Resistance, took me back to the years following the American invasion of Iraq and how I was asked, when I was writing for the British newspaper “The Guardian”, to write an opinion for the American newspaper, “Los Angeles Times”, about the situation in Iraq. The newspaper had issued an internal directive to all journalists not to use the term “resistance” when describing the Iraqi resistance to the American occupation, but rather: “rebellion,” “disobedience” or “terrorism.” The newspaper justified its position that the term "resistance" is linked in people's minds to the French people's resistance to the Nazi invasion, and it is a positive term, and this is not what is desired with regard to Iraq. Well-known Trotskyist journalist and writer Christopher Hitching spoke of his feeling nauseous when some “use the descriptive term “Iraqi resistance” to describe those responsible for attacking American forces...because many of those fighting are either part of the regime’s former secret police or have been imported from jihadist groups outside the country.” !

As for the American and British television interviews, any mention of the real reasons for the invasion, any reference to the fabrication of lies that justified the invasion as weapons of mass destruction, and doubts about the existence of a relationship between the Iraqi regime and al-Qaeda, often led, either to ending the interview quickly or asking me to answer in the form of yes or No, or put me in the ready dock as a supporter of Saddam Hussein's regime.

The comprehensive media coverage in favor of America and NATO countries, these days, does not differ from the coverage that was manufactured before, during and after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, with a basic difference, which is that the invading forces were not Russian, but American-British, and with them the Ukrainian. In its days, the invasion, the “shock and awe” campaign, the bombing of infrastructure, and the killing of civilians were called “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”

When the Iraqis resisted the invaders, articles were not written, and influential humanitarian films were not shown about the willingness, preparation and training of young people to join the resistance. Their photos were not published or written about their love and defense of the homeland. Most of the published and televised stories were about the bravery of American and British soldiers in the face of “Iraqi terrorists.” This was not done haphazardly. Rather, it came as a result of intensive training for about 600 journalists and media professionals, whom the US Department of Defense trained in a special program to fully coexist with forces that were preparing to fight in Iraq. Coexistence created a state of identification between soldiers and journalists, who were allowed to remain with the troops during the actual invasion and in the camps inside Iraq, after the reporters signed a contract stipulating the “basic rules,” i.e. allowing their reports to be reviewed by military officials, and to be escorted at all times from the before military personnel, and allow their expulsion at any time and for any reason. It was natural for the correspondent to live with the forces to tell the story of the war from the point of view of the soldiers, emphasizing the military successes and heroisms of the occupation soldiers, and not the consequences of the invasion on the Iraqi people. A study conducted by the American academic Andrew Londoner on the control of the media in Iraq showed that the monitoring of 742 articles written by 156 journalists showed that 93 percent of the articles written by journalists coexisting with the occupation forces used soldiers as sources for their news, while only 12 percent of the articles referred to losses. The humanity caused by the war on the Iraqi people.

The process of deceiving the masses that America and NATO countries engineered to make their invasion of Iraq a success is met these days, and in the same month, the reflection of its image in the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The coming days will show us, in the midst of the accelerating events, if US President Joe Biden will stand, as George Bush did, on the blood of the victims to announce the American victory.