by B. R. GOWANI
The body of an Afghan child, allegedly shot by a US soldier, is seen with other bodies in the back of a truck in Alkozai village of Panjwayi district, Kandahar province on March 11, 2012. PHOTO/JANGIR/Public Intelligence
If I’m recollecting it correctly, it was South Asian author Rajendra Singh Bedi who once wrote:
“Tawaif hi woh aurat hae jo pados ki maa bahenon ki izzat bachati hae.”
It is courtesan who saves the honor of neighborhood’s mothers and sisters.
Robert Bales
PHOTO/Spc. Ryan Hallock, U.S. Army/Los Angeles Times
US staff Sgt. Robert Bales, deployed in Afghanistan, is accused of killing 17 Afghans, nine of whom were children. (There have been some speculations that this ghastly act is the work of more than one person.)
The names of the dead:
Mohamed Dawood, son of Abdullah
Khudaydad, son of Mohamed Juma
Nazar Mohamed
Payendo
Robeena
Shatarina, daughter of Sultan Mohamed
Zahra, daughter of Abdul Hamid
Nazia, daughter of Dost Mohamed
Masooma, daughter of Mohamed Wazir
Farida, daughter of Mohamed Wazir
Palwasha, daughter of Mohamed Wazir
Nabia, daughter of Mohamed Wazir
Esmatullah, daughter of Mohamed Wazir
Faizullah, son of Mohamed Wazir
Essa Mohamed, son of Mohamed Hussain
Akhtar Mohamed, son of Murrad Ali
(The name of the 17th victim is not yet released)
The names of the wounded:
Haji Mohamed Naim, son of Haji Sakhawat
Mohamed Sediq, son of Mohamed Naim
Parween
Rafiullah
Zardana
Zulheja
To defuse the rising tension between Afghanistan and the US, and to halt further deterioration in their relations, the Pentagon has announced that it will pay $47,000 for each dead person and $11,000 for the each wounded Afghan.
Horrific act–not an exception
Bales action should not be construed as something out of the blue. Rather it is the norm and has happened not only in Afghanistan(urinating on corpses or cutting off body parts of dead Afghans as trophies) but also in the Philippines (the Filipinos were hanged by the thumbs), Vietnam (use of Agent Orange or My Lai Massacre), and so many other countries where the US troops have gone on a mission to spread democracy or to civilize others or to force countries to open their markets for US businesses.
Are these tragedies preventable?
No. The members of the armed forces who take part in these wars are imbued profusely with tons of hatred of the “others” by the corporate controlled news media and the government machinery before they embark on their mission. In this atmosphere you can’t expect any other course of action.
What if the US stops foreign wars?
It will be a great calamity.
And for a number of reasons. There are 1,458,219 active troops in the US. Once the business of foreign wars is wound up, more than a million troops will have to be laid off. The reason being that the defense of the United States doesn’t require that many troops. Besides, militarily and technologically it’s the most powerful nation on planet earth and so the defense will be technology-based rather than men power-based or conventional.
Capitalism is inherently unegalitarian and so a huge disparity in income and wealth is to be expected. But since the 1970s, the disparities have widened. For many people who can’t find a job or can’t afford college education, the armed forces are always there with open arms. (No pun intended.) (That’s why unemployment is a good thing for the Defense Department. For the businesses too it’s a great thing because then they can determine the price of the laborer.)
According to filmmaker Rick Rowley, the number of “hardcore white nationalists” in the US is 30,000. Add to that number, quarter of a million of their sympathizers. Their basic philosophy is that this country belongs to the white people.
Now imagine a very probable scenario: A million of the troops, well versed in arms and ammunition handling, and full of hatred–after seeing the “others” from very close–ends up as jobless. You already have 30,000 hardcore nationalists supported by 250,000 sympathizers. A very dangerous cocktail indeed.
This cocktail, if not filtered of its dangerous elements in time, can shake the corridors of the ruling class. The capitalists do permit tension among different groups and among labor classes up till a certain extent, that is, till the time it doesn’t hurt them or is beneficial. But the moment it seems the conflict will spill over onto the streets and will interfere with the economy, it’s a NO NO.
So the US is not going to discontinue this business of foreign wars, covert and/or overt, because it is not only profitable for the merchants of death but is also a great outlet for a segment of the population nursed on hatred about “others”. Who the “enemy” or enemies” is/are, the location, and the time of the war is decided by the establishment–it’s their prerogative.
The foreign victims are our tawaifs
The above analogy of tawaif can be applied in the case of the foreign victims of the United States but in a different context: It is the foreign victims of the US wars which saves most of the people in this country from mayhem and chaos.
Imagine what would have happened if the United States hadn’t gone to war against Afghanistan in the wake of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The minorities would have suffered many fold more than what they experienced in the wake of the attacks.
Once the George Bush government announced that it’ll go to war against Afghanistan, the segment of the population burning with a rage to avenge the attack knew that now they or their friends or family members or their co-nationalists will be on a mission to kick asses of foreigners. Then another “enemy” Iraq was added to the list where the “war on terror” was to be waged. And so not many asses of “foreigners” were kicked in this country.
(Who cares for the history: How the Afghanistan was turned into a battleground for the US imperial motives, and for the Saudi and Pakistani establishments. Or how the Osama bin Laden was groomed by the US, or Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with the September 11 attacks.)
B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com