Noam Chomsky once again proves that he knows much about language, but little about things political. Chomsky dissects the Iraqi election and predicts the future: Well there’s going to be a Shiite majority, so they’ll have some significant influence over policy. The first thing they’ll do is reestablish relations with Iran. Now they don’t particularly like Iran, but they don’t want to go to war with them so they’ll move toward what was happening already even under Saddam, that is, restoring some sort of friendly relations with Iran. That’s the last thing the United States wants. It has worked very hard to try to isolate Iran. The next thing that might happen is that a Shiite-controlled, more or less democratic Iraq might stir up feelings in the Shiite areas of Saudi Arabia, which happen to be right nearby and which happen to be where all the oil is. So you might find what in Washington must be the ultimate nightmare — a Shiite region which controls most of the world’s oil and is independent. Furthermore, it is very likely that an independent, sovereign Iraq would try to take its natural place as a leading state in the Arab world, maybe the leading state. And you know that’s something that goes back to biblical times. Chomsky describes the Shiites as little more than irrational tyrants bent on dominating the Middle East, which includes having to eradicate Israel. "Now the regional enemy, overpowering enemy, is Israel. They’re going to have to rearm to confront Israel — which means probably developing weapons of mass destruction, just as a deterrent." Iraq must, MUST, develop WMD because of its obsession with regional domination. Funny enough, Chomsky then goes on to harangue the US for treating Arabs like children: And the propaganda is very evident right in these articles. You can even write the commentary now: We just have to [have a prolonged occupation of Iraq] because we have to accomplish our mission of bringing democracy to Iraq. If they have an elected government that doesn’t understand that, well, what can we do with these dumb Arabs, you know? Who treats the Arabs as dumb? Is it the Bush administration which believes them capable of self-government, or Chomsky, who sees the Middle East as a seat of ancient Biblical and irrational, hatreds? What is the solution then, Noam? If Chomsky’s view of the Middle East is correct, then it seems support for friendly dictatorship is the best bet. It’s the only thing which will keep the Middle East from becoming a war zone. Obviously the fanatics who make up the population can’t rule (at least not the Shiite fanatics). Yet support for dictatorships is just the thing Chomsky claims to oppose. If George Bush is correct, than the future of the Middle East lies with free government.
Recent Comments