This hypocrisy almost takes the breath away, not least because the US
President is still too frightened – in case he upsets the Turks – to
use the “G” word about the 1915 Turkish genocide of a million and a half
Armenian Christians, a mass slaughter on a scale which even Abu Bakr’s
thugs have not yet attempted. We’ll have to wait another year to see how
Obama wriggles out of the 100th anniversary commemorations of that
particular Muslim massacre of Christians.
Nor
has Obama said anything about his friendly ally Saudi Arabia, whose
Salafists are the inspiration and fund-raisers for the Sunni militias of
Iraq and Syria, just as they were for the Taliban in Afghanistan. The
wall between the Saudis and the monsters they create – and which America
now bombs – must be kept as high as it must be invisible. That is the
measure of American dissimulation in this latest act of duplicity. Obama
is bombing the friends of his Saudi allies – and the enemies of the
Assad regime in Syria, by the way – but won’t say so. And just for good
measure, he believes that America must act in defence of its consulate
in Erbil and embassy in Baghdad.
That’s the same excuse the US
used when it fired its naval guns into the Chouf mountains of Lebanon 30
years ago: that Lebanon’s pro-Syrian warlords were endangering the US
embassy in Beirut. That the Islamists are as unlikely to seize Irbil as
they are to capture Baghdad is neither here nor there. Obama says he has
a “mandate” to bomb from the Iraqi government of Nouri al-Maliki, the
elected but dictatorial Shia who now runs Iraq as a broken and sectarian
state. How we Westerners love “mandates”, ever since the 1919 Treaty of
Versailles, which drew the borders of the Middle East for our
“mandates” – the very frontiers which Abu Bakr’s caliphate has now sworn
to destroy. There is not much doubt about the awfulness of the equally
sectarian Isis which Abu Bakr is creating.
His threat to the Christians of Iraq – convert, pay tax or
die – has now been turned against the Yazidis, the harmless and tiny
sect whose Persian-Assyrian roots, Christian-Islamo rituals and
forgiving God have doomed them as assuredly as the Christians. Ethnic
Kurds, the poor old Yazidis believe that God, whose seven angels
supposedly govern the Earth, pardoned Satan: so inevitably, this ancient
people came to be regarded as devil-worshippers. Hence their 130,000
refugees – at least 40,000 of them living on mountain rocks in at least
nine locations around Mount Sinjar – tell stories of rape, murder and
child-killing at the hands of Abu Bakr’s men. Alas, they may all be
true.
The Yazidis are probably descended from supporters of the
second Umayyad Caliph, Yazid the First; his suppression of Hussein, the
son of Ali – whose followers are now the Shia of the Middle East – might
theoretically have commended the Yazidis to Abu Bakr’s Sunni Muslim
army. But their mixed rituals and their denial of evil were never going
to find favour with a group which – like Saudi Arabia and the Taliban –
believes in “the suppression of vice and the propagation of virtue”. In
the fault lines that lie across ancient Kurdistan, Armenia and what was
Mesopotamia, history has dealt the Yazidis a bad hand.
But for
them and the Nestorians and other Christian groups, Obama has gone to
war. The French, their old Crusader spirits reawakened, called the
Security Council to reflect upon this Christian pogrom. But the question
remains: would America have done the same if the wretched minority
refugees of northern Iraq had been Palestinians? Or will Obama’s latest
bombing campaign merely provide a welcome distraction from the killing
fields of Gaza?
"The Independent," August 8, 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment