‘The war in Iraq was built on false premises and many Americans still do notunderstand why their government invaded Iraq,’ says US Congressman Rush Holt
THE recent images flashed by the media of Iraqi prisoners being subjected to brutal torture at the hands of occupational forces have evoked a strong wave of protest and uproar from the Muslim world. Over time, the reports have hurt America’s credibility across the world and not just in the Muslim nations.
Dawn Magazine recently spoke to Congressman Rush Holt, a Democrat from New Jersey and a US lawmaker who is also known in the Pakistani community for his efforts to save a Pakistani family from deportation. A Ph.D in physics, he has served in the State Department as an arms control expert, monitoring the nuclear programmes of countries such as Iraq, Iran, North Korea and the former Soviet Union.
Q. What impact will the reports of prisoner abuses in Iraq have on the Muslim world?
A. Our credibility is hurt for the entire world. In one thing after another, our justifications for going to war are called into questions, whether it is because of Iraq’s connections to 9/11, weapons of mass destruction, to remove barbarous behaviour and lawlessness from Iraq. One after another, those justifications are gone. And that hurt our credibility.
In the particular case of prison atrocities, I imagine that most of the Muslim world would say we have a total misunderstanding of Islam, of their culture as well as of religion of Islam. That’s not helpful.
Q. Why did those US soldiers commit these abuses, frustration, lack of training, anger over 9/11 or simply because they hated Muslims?
A. It is an eternal truth of war that in war there is a tendency to demonize one’s opponent. The warriors become single minded in fighting for their cause. Too often they lose sight of humanity. That’s not peculiar to this fighting. It goes back to Troy or Carthage.
Q. But what was peculiar about the situation in Iraq?
A. Americans really do have a misunderstanding of the Muslim world. There are few people who speak the language, fewer still who have travelled in any way to gain understanding in Muslim countries. We need a better understanding of the world including its major segments such as the Muslim world.
It seems Americans want everyone to be like us, rather than making an effort to understand them. I know some of my militant colleagues would say we do not win a war with understanding. I would argue that we prevent wars with understanding.
Q. Was this war necessary?
A. No. The worst thing you can say about a war is it’s unnecessary. You can say how generals had a bad strategy; how the logistics were wrong but the worst thing you can say about a war is that it was unnecessary. And we can say about this war that it was unnecessary.
Q. And what made this war unnecessary?
A. It was a war that was built on a false premise and on an unexamined premise. We have all heard a long list of intelligence failure (about America’s reasons for going to war, such as the claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium). And I think this war was also built on a misunderstanding of whether the US policy of containment was working, whether military action could replace the despicable behaviour of Saddam Hussein.
This war was successful in deposing and ultimately capturing him, but was that the most effective cure for the disease?
Q. But the misunderstanding between the Muslim and Western worlds goes much deeper than the war in Iraq?
A. But is it inevitable? Is it fundamental? I would like to believe that it is not a fundamental wall of misunderstanding. I remember in the months leading up to the war some of my colleagues were saying that the Muslim world would only understand force. I say the human nature despises the weak, but it does not mean it is the only way to deal with someone you differ with, as we differed with Saddam and his regime.
Q. Removing Saddam was not an unpopular cause and still the war is unpopular. What went wrong?
A. The war is unpopular because it was built on false premises. It was probably doomed. And unfortunately, the US military leadership is still behaving as if the premises were true and that makes it very hard to be successful.
If success was just to depose Saddam, then fine, the war was successful. This war was to lead this new view of government, to set an example for the entire world to see, to make the neighbours behave better because of Iraq’s example. No one was saying the goal of the war was to see the people of Iraq free, but that’s not how the occupation was taken.
Q. Do you agree with those who say that President George W. Bush invaded Iraq to remove Saddam because his father had failed to do so?
A. I can’t get into his head to know the psychology of the President and what motivated him, but certainly what my colleagues talked about was Iraq’s connection to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear. I believed it at the time and all the world believes now that this was a misapprehension. But certainly my colleagues were motivated. Recently, an 11-year old asked me at a meeting, “Do you think this was about oil?”
Q. Was it about oil?
A. The President and his aides, it is said, have much of their interest in that part of the world because of oil. But that does not mean the war was fought because of oil, although oil does explain their interest in that part of the world.
I believe my colleagues were willing to send our youngsters to the war for other reasons, not oil. They did so to bring security, misguided as it may have been.
Q. What are the major issues that make it difficult for the Western and Islamic worlds to understand each other? Is it Israel?
A. Israel? Sure. It is one of the issues but not the only issue. I would say the US policy with regard to Israel, with regard to Saudi Arabia, to Kurds and Turkey, to Iran, to Pakistan, to Afghanistan, all of that is involved. It is not just Israel. What is happening politically is no more a result of the US policy towards Israel than the US policy towards Saudi Arabia. Both of them are important to what will happen and what has happened in Iraq.
Q. And what is the US policy towards Saudi Arabia?
A. We really have to examine our policy towards Saudi Arabia. It has been a fairly simplistic and commercial relationship over the years. We haven’t had a thorough review of what that should be.
Q. Do you think removing misunderstandings between Muslims and other communities, such as Jews, will help?
A. Absolutely. Any number of steps that the United States can take to improve understanding with the Muslims can go a long way toward preventing wars and conflicts.
There is a long list of things we can do. I am a big advocate of foreign language studies. There are few people who study Arabic and other cultures. We also need to encourage various religious communities, here in the United States and abroad, to know each other better, to learn more about our language, cultures and traditions. All these will help.
‘The war in Iraq was built on false premises and many Americans still do notunderstand why their government invaded Iraq,’ says US Congressman Rush Holt 
