My question is this: why don’t more journalists probe into Iraq’s neighboring countries to find out what their leaders say and suggest for rebuilding Iraq after the war? As a reader, budding journalist, and a human being, I am distraught that I haven’t read more interviews with the leaders of other Middle Eastern countries. I’m sure they’d have some cultural and political insight that the Bush administration could use but would choose not to.
Iraq is falling apart and having an election alone is not going to put her back together again. The Bush administration spins optimism to the journalists who turn around and spoon-feed it to us – and most of us believe them. Where’s the other side to the story?
Prince Saud al-Faisal - the foreign minister from Saudi Arabia – is finally being heard. Check out this story published Friday at The New York Times. I don’t doubt that there are other leaders in other countries surrounding Iraq who also have some advice that would be worth-while to hear and even possibly (gasp!) take into consideration when rebuilding a country we helped take apart.
On FratPack.com I found some more great quotes not mentioned in the NY Times article:
On Iraq, the foreign minister expressed skepticism at Bush administration officials' predictions that the upcoming political events in Iraq would heal the country's divisions.
"Perhaps what they are saying is going to happen," he said. "I wish it would happen, but I don't think that a constitution by itself will resolve the issues, or an election by itself will solve the difficult problems."
U.S. policies in Iraq risk dividing the country into three separate parts: Kurdish, Sunni and Shiite, he cautioned.
"We have not seen a move inside Iraq that would satisfy us that the national unity of Iraq, and therefore the territorial unity of Iraq, will be assured," he said.
He also said the Saudis were skeptical of the outcome before the United States went to war in Iraq, but its concerns weren't always heeded.
"It is frustrating to see something that is clearly going to happen and you are not listened to by a friend and soon harm comes out of it," Saud said. "It hurts."
The Middle East and the U.S. are cultural opposites. There has been tension between Sunnis and Shiites (two different religious branches of Islam) in Iraq for years. Since the fall of Saddam the tension between these two groups has been escalating. We as Americans do not and cannot truly grasp what it means to live in their culture. Why is it our right to decide what is best for that part of the world?
This story from The News Blog states:
Whatever else one might be able to say about Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, one must grant he has more experience than George W. Bush as an informed observer of the mid-east scene. Furthermore, his record marks him as being more peace-loving than Bush.
If Bush and his cohorts want to do the best job they should do less talking and more listening – and journalists should do more probing and less regurgitating.
Alan Attoof @ September 23, 2005 - 8:55pm
Alan Attoof Graduate Student Journalsim Dept-NYU alanattoof@yahoo.com +1-215-908-5794
I can see your point Melanie, but it is better for the Saudi Arabia government control its boreders with Iraq so as not to allow the Saudi terrorists come inside Iraq and kill American soldiers and Iraqi civillians. Besides, these guys in Saudi Arabia and in other neighboring countries like Syria and Iran are all afraid of having a democratic change in the region, like the one happened in Iraq. Imagine that Prince Saud al-Faisal has been a foreign minister for 30 years. Women in his country are not allowed to vote yet. So how do you expect him to bless a change from dictatorship to democracy in Iraq. They wanted a 30 year old dictatorship of Iraq to stay because they themselves are dictators. So they prefer more dictatorship examples arround them, not more democracies.
»