Progress [sic] in Iraq and embassies attacked

Juan Cole's Informed Comment blog is a daily illustration of the fact that some good news reporting is being done, even by some of our generally dysfunctional Establishment press. We can't expect every metropolitan daily to have experts in Shi'a Islam like Cole on staff. But our news organizations (print, cable, broadcast, online) should be organizing and presenting information in much the way Cole's blog does it.

His posts for just the two days 02/22/08 and 02/23/08 illustrate this well. For instance, the Reuters news agency has an Iraq Special Coverage page at their Web site that includes daily updates on the fighting in Iraq. Cole quotes their "Factbox" reports of 02/23/08 on the fighting in Iraq the previous day, Security developments in Iraq, Feb 23. For instance, just on Friday, "A barrage of mortar bombs or rockets hit Baghdad's heavily protected Green Zone, home to the U.S. embassy and the Iraqi government. The U.S. embassy refused to say whether there had been any casualties or damage."

Now, it's always tricky when you start speculating, "if this had been in so-and-so, it would have been bigger news." But in this case, it's entirely appropriate for us to compare how this news was treated compared to the attack on the US Embassy in Serbia on Thursday. That at least attracted some prominent reporting, and led UN Ambassador Kalmay Khalilzad (neocon bigwig and former US Ambassador the Iraq) to go before the TV cameras at the UN and express his outrage at this attack on sovereign US territory, which Embassies are. The attacks there involved demonstrators burning part of the embassy buildings. And that was a really serious event.

But the compound housing the US Embassy in Baghdad, the most expensive and heavily defended US Embassy on the planet, came under fire by a "barrage of mortar bombs or rockets". And even in Reuters' report, it ranks second paragraph. Just another day in Baghdad. Midday Saturday, I did a quick and admittedlly unscientific Web surfing to see how many online outlets of major papers had homepage headlines like, "US Embassy compund in Baghdad hit by explosive projectiles: Attack follows Thursday assault on US Embassy in Serbia", or even mention it. San Francisco Chronicle? Nope. Los Angeles Times? Yes. (Blasts Strike Baghdad's Green Zone, an original report; New York Times? Yes. (Mortars or Rockets Strike Green Zone, AP report) Washington Post? Yes. (Baghdad Green Zone Attacked, an AP report)Chicago Tribune? Yes. (Baghdad Green Zone Attacked AP report) Atlanta Journal-Constitution? No. St. Petersburg Times? No.

That makes four of seven, with three of the four being the AP wire report. And in all four cases, it's one of the small-print headlines. But even in small print, it tells about a serious incident. And makes a joke of the chatter by the Republicans and the Big Pundits about how The Surge has been such a stunning success. And that's just one incident on one day!

Just to be clear: I think the attack on the US Embassy in Serbia is a more significant event. The point I'm making here is that if anyone really believed that the situation in Baghdad is stable or peaceful, the blasts in the Green Zone would be bigger news, and the Sunday talking heads would be chattering ernestly tomorrow about whether this was an new "Al Qa'ida" intitiative or merely some other militarily bold and competent terrorist group attacking. But it really is more like "just another day in Baghdad", although any time the Green Zone is attacked, it's worth paying attention. Setting up mortars and/or rockets to fire into what may be the most heavily defended piece of real estate on earth is not something the neighborhood drug dealers would do for a lark. When was the last time you heard of mortar or rocket fire on a police station or courthouse in an American city? If such a thing occurred, it would be front page news across the country (even allowing for press dysfunctionality). And we would hear solemn speculation about whether that city or state or even the whole country was being "Colombianized", and whether we needed a Surge in the War on Drugs? (Remember the "war on drugs"?)

McClatchy Newspapers (which bought out Knight-Ridder) has been doing probably the best job of any American news service of covering the Iraq War since the runup to the war itself. Much of the newspaper-reading and TV-watching public doesn't learn about much of their reporting. But it is there.

And, oh, yeah, McClatchy reports that Kurdish troops, i.e., militias controlled by the Iraqi Kurdish political parties, have mobilized against the Turkish invasion of northern Iraq, though this article doesn't report direct military clashes (Iraqi Kurds ready to confront Turkish troops by Yasseen Taha and Leila Fadel 02/22/08). Or, to put it another way, our critical ally in the Great War Against Terrorism And Bogeymen, Iraq, has been invaded by our NATO ally Turkey. The Turkish army is now in a military confrontation with the militias of the Kurdish parties, the most pro-American (or, at least until now, the least anti-American) of the major groups in Iraq. As Cole observes, "this is the stuff of which hot wars are made, folks."

Cole also comments on Three Events that changed the World 02/21/08: the Turkish invasion of northern Iraq; the assault on the American Embassy in Belgrade, Serbia; and, Clinton debating Obama only to a draw. Perhaps he's being a bit over-dramatic about the third one. But his comments on the situation with Serbia are worthwhile:

Note that Neoconservative pundits kept telling us that there was something deeply wrong with Muslims for protesting when they were kicked or expelled, saying that look, the Serbs have been harmed by US policies but they don't go around attacking US embassies. I guess they'll have to find a new argument.

And given that the Serbs are Eastern Orthodox Christians, will the Republican Party and Fox Cable News now start fulminating against "Christofascism?"

In Turkey invades Iraq... 01/23/08, he writes:

I review the news below and don't somehow conclude that the US occupation of Iraq is a success story. I know we are paying a lot for our presence in Iraq. I can't figure out what the average American is receiving for the money. It isn't increased security, since Iraq is a training ground for terrorists who will likely hit the US or US interests in future. It isn't extra petroleum, at least not for us ordinary folks. Maybe the US oil majors will do well out of it. But even they say they can't do business in Iraq without oil legislations. And petroleum prices held above $98 a barrel on Friday. The Turkish invasion of Iraq was cited as one reason for the price increase. Instead of asking "are things hopeful in Iraq?" or "is there progress in Iraq?", the American media and public should be asking, "What are we getting out of all this?" That is the question the US Right fears most of all, which is why they ask the 'progress' question all the time. They only have two settings, "slow progress" and "progress." A burned out hulk of a city like Falluja? A sign of "slow progress."

What a disaster. Heckuva job, Cheney, Bush, Rummy. You'll be remembered for this for a long time.

Tags: iraq war, juan cole, serbia