Al-Jazeerah History  
	 
	
	
	Archives  
	 
	
	
	Mission & Name   
	 
	
	
	
	Conflict Terminology   
	 
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	
	Gaza Holocaust   
	 
	
	Gulf War   
	 
	
	Isdood  
	 
	
	Islam   
	 
	
	News   
	 
	
	
	News Photos 
	  
	 
	
	
	Opinion 
	
	
	Editorials  
	 
	
	
	
	US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles)   
	 
	
	www.aljazeerah.info
	  
      
       
      
        
        
     | 
     | 
    
         
	  The Quiet American  
	  By Uri Avnery 
	  Gush Shalom, January 11, 2010 
	     THE QUIET AMERICAN was the hero of Graham Greene’s novel about 
	  the first Vietnam War, the one fought by the French.   He was a 
	  young and naïve American, a professor’s son, who had enjoyed a good 
	  education at Harvard, an idealist with all the best intentions. When he 
	  was sent to Vietnam, he wanted to help the natives to overcome the two 
	  evils as he saw them: French colonialism and Communism. Knowing absolutely 
	  nothing about the country in which he was acting, he caused a disaster. 
	  The book ends with a massacre, the outcome of his misguided efforts. He 
	  illustrated the old saying: “The road to hell is paved with good 
	  intentions.”   Since this book was written, 54 years have passed, 
	  but it seems that the Quiet American has not changed a bit. He is still an 
	  idealist (at least, in his own view of himself), still wants to bring 
	  redemption to foreign and far-away peoples about whom he knows nothing, 
	  still causes terrible disasters: in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now, it seems, 
	  in Yemen.   THE IRAQI example is the simplest one.   The 
	  American soldiers were sent there to overthrow the tyrannical regime of 
	  Saddam Hussein. There were, of course, also some less altruistic 
	  objectives, such as taking control of the Iraqi oil resources and 
	  stationing an American garrison in the heart of the Middle Eastern oil 
	  region. But for the American public, the adventure was presented as an 
	  idealistic enterprise to topple a bloody dictator, who was menacing the 
	  world with nuclear bombs.   That was six years ago, and the war is 
	  still going on. Barack Obama, who opposed the war right from the start, 
	  promised to lead the Americans out of there. In the meantime, in spite of 
	  all the talking, no end is in sight.   Why? Because the real 
	  decision-makers in Washington had no idea of the country which they wanted 
	  to liberate and help to live happily ever after.   Iraq was from the 
	  beginning an artificial state. The British masters glued together several 
	  Ottoman provinces to suit their own colonial interests. They crowned a 
	  Sunni Arab as king over the Kurds, who are not Arab, and the Shiites, who 
	  are not Sunni. Only a succession of dictators, each of them more brutal 
	  than his predecessor, prevented the state from falling apart.   The 
	  Washington planners were not interested in the history, demography or 
	  geography of the country which they entered with brutal force. The way it 
	  looked to them, it was quite simple: One had to topple the tyrant, 
	  establish democratic institutions on the American model, conduct free 
	  elections, and everything else would fall into place by itself.   
	  Contrary to their expectations, they were not received with flowers. 
	  Neither did they discover Saddam’s terrible atom bomb. Like the proverbial 
	  elephant in the porcelain shop, they shattered everything, destroyed the 
	  country and got bogged in a swamp.   After years of bloody military 
	  operations that led nowhere, they found a temporary remedy. To hell with 
	  idealism, to hell with the lofty aims, to hell with all military doctrines 
	  – they’re now simply buying off the tribal chiefs, who constitute the 
	  reality of Iraq.   The Quiet American has no idea how to get out. He 
	  knows that if he does, the country may well disintegrate in mutual 
	  bloodletting.   TWO YEARS before entering the Iraqi swamp, the 
	  Americans invaded the Afghan quagmire.   Why? Because an 
	  organization called al-Qaeda (“the basis”) had claimed responsibility for 
	  the destruction of the Twin Towers in New York. Al-Qaeda’s chiefs were in 
	  Afghanistan, their training camps were there. To the Americans, everything 
	  was clear – there was no need for second thoughts (neither, for that 
	  matter, for first thoughts.)   If they had had any knowledge of the 
	  country they were about to invade, they might have, perhaps, hesitated. 
	  Afghanistan has always been a graveyard for invaders. Mighty empires had 
	  escaped from there with their tails between their legs. Unlike flat Iraq, 
	  Afghanistan is a country of mountains, a paradise for guerrillas.  It 
	  is the home of several different peoples and uncounted tribes, each one 
	  fiercely jealous of its independence.     The Washington 
	  planners were not really interested. For them, it seems, all countries are 
	  the same, and so are all societies. In Afghanistan, too, American-style 
	  democracy must be established, free and fair elections must be held, and 
	  hoppla – everything else will sort itself out.   The elephant 
	  entered the shop without knocking and achieved a resounding victory. The 
	  Air Force pounded, the army conquered without problems, al-Qaeda 
	  disappeared like a ghost, the Taliban (“religious pupils”) ran away. Women 
	  could again appear in the streets without covering their hair, girls could 
	  attend schools, the opium fields flourished again, and so did Washington’s 
	  protégés in Kabul.   However - the war goes on, year after year, the 
	  number of American dead is rising inexorably. What for? Nobody knows. It 
	  seems as if the war has acquired a life of its own, without aim, without 
	  reason.   An American could well ask himself: What the hell are we 
	  doing there?     THE IMMEDIATE aim, the expulsion of al-Qaeda 
	  from Afghanistan, has ostensibly been achieved. Al-Qaeda is not there – if 
	  it ever really was there.   I wrote once that al-Qaeda is an America 
	  invention and that Osama Bin-Laden has been sent by Hollywood’s Central 
	  Casting to play the role. He is simply too good to be true.   That 
	  was, of course, a bit of an exaggeration. But not altogether. The US is 
	  always in need of a world-wide enemy. In the past it was International 
	  Communism, whose agents were lurking behind every tree and under every 
	  floor tile. But, alas, the Soviet Union and its minions had collapsed, 
	  there was an urgent need for an enemy to fill the void. This was found in 
	  the shape of the world-wide jihad of al-Qaeda. The crushing of “World 
	  Terrorism” became the overriding American aim.   That aim is 
	  nonsense. Terrorism is nothing but an instrument of war. It is used by 
	  organizations that are vastly different from each other, which are 
	  fighting in vastly different countries for vastly different objectives. A 
	  war on “International Terror” is like a war on “International Artillery” 
	  or “International Navy”.   A world-embracing movement led by Osama 
	  Bin-Laden just does not exist. Thanks to the Americans, al-Qaeda has 
	  become a prestige brand in the guerrilla market, much like McDonald’s and 
	  Armani in the world of fast food and fashion. Every militant Islamist 
	  organization can appropriate the name for itself, even without a franchise 
	  from Bin-Laden.   American client regimes, who used to brand all 
	  their local enemies as “communist” in order to procure the help of their 
	  patrons, now brand them as “al-Qaeda terrorists”.   Nobody knows 
	  where Bin-Laden is – if he is at all – and there is no proof of his being 
	  in Afghanistan. Some believe that he is in neighboring Pakistan. And even 
	  if he were hiding in Afghanistan – what justification is there for 
	  conducting a war and killing thousands of people in order to hunt down one 
	  person?      Some say: OK, so there is no Bin-Laden.  
	  But the Taliban have to be prevented from coming back.   Why, for 
	  god’s sake? What business is it of the US who rules Afghanistan? One can 
	  loathe religious fanatics in general and the Taliban in particular – but 
	  is this a reason for an endless war?   If the Afghans themselves 
	  prefer the Taliban to the opium dealers who are in power in Kabul, it is 
	  their business. It seems that they do, judging by the fact that the 
	  Taliban are again in control of most of the country. That is no good 
	  reason for a Vietnam-style war.    But how do you get out? Obama 
	  does not know. During the election campaign he promised, with a 
	  candidate’s foolhardiness, to enlarge the war there, as a compensation for 
	  leaving Iraq. Now he is stuck in both places – and in the near future, it 
	  seems, he will be stuck in a third war, too.     DURING THE last 
	  few days, the name of Yemen has been cropping up more and more often. 
	  Yemen – a second Afghanistan, a third Vietnam.   The elephant is 
	  raring to enter another shop. And this time, too, it doesn’t care about 
	  the porcelain.   I know very little about Yemen, but enough to 
	  understand that only a madman would want to be sucked in there. It is 
	  another artificial state, composed of two different parts – the country of 
	  Sanaa in the North and the (former British) South. Most of the country is 
	  mountainous terrain, ruled by bellicose tribes guarding their 
	  independence. Like Afghanistan, it is an ideal region for guerrilla 
	  warfare.   There, too, is an organization that has adopted the 
	  grandiose name of “Al-Qaeda of the Arab Peninsula” (after the Yemenite 
	  militants united with their Saudi brothers). But its chiefs are interested 
	  in world revolution much less than in the intrigues and battles of the 
	  tribes among themselves and against the “central” government, a reality 
	  with a history of thousands of years. Only a complete fool would lay his 
	  head on this bed.   The name Yemen means “country on the right”. (If 
	  one looks towards Mecca from the West, Yemen is on the right side and 
	  Syria on the left.) The right side also connotes happiness, and the name 
	  of Yemen is connected to al-Yamana, an Arabic word for being happy. The 
	  Romans called it Arabia Felix (“Happy Arabia”) because it was rich through 
	  trading in spices.   (By the way, Obama may be interested to hear 
	  that another leader of a superpower, Caesar Augustus, once tried to invade 
	  Yemen and was  trounced.)   If the Quiet American, in his usual 
	  mixture of idealism and ignorance, decides to bring democracy and all the 
	  other goodies there, that will be the end of this happiness. The Americans 
	  will sink into another quagmire, tens of thousands of people will be 
	  killed, and it will all end in disaster.     IT MAY well be that 
	  the problem is rooted – inter alia – in the architecture of Washington DC. 
	    This city is full of huge buildings populated with the ministries and 
	  other offices of the only superpower in the world. The people working 
	  there feel the tremendous might of their empire. They look upon the tribal 
	  chiefs of Afghanistan and Yemen as a rhinoceros looks down at the ants 
	  that rush around between its feet. The Rhino walks over them without 
	  noticing. But the ants survive.   Altogether, the Quiet American 
	  resembles Mephistopheles in Goethe’s Faust, who defines himself as the 
	  force that “always wants the bad and always creates the good”. Only the 
	  other way round.   
	    
	  
       | 
     | 
     
      
      
      
      
     |