Figure 1.--

A Dutch reader has provided an esppecially thoughtful assessment of the Iraq situation and the larger meaning of American action. He writes, "Some remarks with an outspokenness that I usually try to avoid in matters politic. However, since HBC has become a forum for open discussion , I feel I feel compeled to contribute. I feel that HBC too often treats 'Europe' as a monolith. Don't. We hold a variety of views, both as countries and as individuals." Our Dutch reader is especially concerned about the unintended consequences of American actions, a concern which HBC shares.

Europe

I feel that HBC too often treats 'Europe' as a monolith. Don't. We hold a variety of views, both as countries and as individuals. Don't. We hold a variety of views, both as countriesand as individuals. The Dutch government were supportive of the U.S. even though 60 percent of the population were against it. The French are obstructive yet a friend of mine who is a doctor in the Champagne has been sporting the Union Jack and the Stars-and-Stripes in his waiting room ever since the beginning of this war.

American Motivation

I personally do not believe that any decision maker ever wages war primarily to liberate another people, nor should he. War is about self-defense, either physically or economicaly, at best, and about conquest at worst. I believe in what the French call raison d'état. Very, very un-Dutch of me. [Here HBC wants to comment. Our Dutch reader is of course quite essentially correct. Nations generally go to war for a range of issues and idealistic or humanitarian reasons are usually low in the actual reasons for war. More often it is the power politics of the era. This ceratinly was the case throuh out European history. Britain for example went to war in World War I and II not out of idealism but to prevent a German conquest of Europe and the dangers it posed for Britain. Of course how the war is justified in propaganda and public statements is a different matter. America here is no exception. America entered World War II because of Pearl Harbor, but was fighting NAZI U-boats in the North Atlantic months before the Japanese attack to prevent a German defeat of Britain and domination of Europe. This of course would have posed a deadly threat to America. That said, there is an idealistic thread in American foreign policy unlike anything in European history. For this reason, many Europeans are dismisive of it. The Europeans first encountered this when Clemanceau and the other Allied leaders found that President Wilson really believed in his 14 points. They were contemtous of what they considered his simplistic and unsophisticated attitudes. We would even go so far to say that America has interevenred in some cases for primarily humanitarian grounds. The actions in Somalia and Kosovo, for example, were largely conducted for humanitarian purposes. Even more important is that America identifies its interests with the support of democratic and open societies. Here as with other countries the execution of this principle has been imperfect. Just as Britain and France joined with the Tsar to fight the Germans, America duing the Cold War supported many dictators. In Europe, however, America has consitently supported democracy. This was not just out of idealism, but out of the conviction that support for democratic rule is in America's long-term interests. There are many reasons for believing this, not the least the fact that there are relatively few examples i hisory of democratic countries ranging war.]

War with Iraq

Unlike most of my fellow countrymen I was, on balance, in favour of the invasion, believing that, if the alleged possession of WMD is true, legitimate self-defense can be invoked. Whether I was right has yet to be proven.

European Opinions

Even disbelieving and disapproving Europeans had little doubt that by far the majority of Iraqis would rejoice at the ousting of Mr. Husein as soon as it would be safe to do so. Allow for exceptions with those who sustain the death or mutilation of a relative or close friend. [Here HBC is mistified. We understand that a war with Iraq was controversial, in part because of public rejection of war in general. What we do not understand is why there was such an enormous public demonstation of opposition if most Europeans thought that the Iraqi people would be overjoyed with his removal.]

Moslem Response

Rather than being curious about the response of 'Europe' I am wondering about the other Arab countries and about the Mohammedan world at large. It may be difficult for you to believe to what extent e.g. the Indonesians were sympathizing with the Iraqis, and I mean with the regime. Even those who in times past spoke sympathetically about the U.S. were hoping for the Iraqis to put on a fierce fight, perhaps even to put to rout the invader. You and I may see this as a war of self-defense alternative liberation, over there it is perceived as a religious conflict of Westerners/Christians against Muhammedans. Their papers were full of references to 'kaum salibis' i.e. the Crusaders. I've just watched a Dutch scholar spelling today's Arab newspapers : schock, dismay, even disbelief and denial that Baghdad could have fallen. It will take some time before they ajust to the facts. There is this attitude of Muhammadans condoning even the most horrifying crime if perpetrated by one of their faith. We have been socializing for a long time with Islamics both in Holland and Indonesia, well bred and educated people, averse from fundamentalism, some of them of ancient Javanese nobility. One would expect them to speak out clearly against al-Qaedah much as Dutch Protestants and Catholics abhor the excesses of their co-religionists in Ireland. No one has done so. I have heard a physician suggest that the CIA is behind 9/11 in an effort to secure funds for its operations. I wish the coalition forces much wisdom, diplomatic talent, patience and compassion as they are setting about 'winning the hearts of the Iraqi people'. As for now I hope they well be able to check the atrocities that are usually perpetrated by the liberated against their former oppressors. [HBC aggres that this this is a critical question. We have negun to address some of the issues involved in Islam and America.]

Final Comments

Just to leave no doubt: The fact that in my opinion American interventions, even if presented as humanitarian, are primarily geared to legitimate self-defense does not mean that I think that Europeans should not be cooperative and grateful. Most of these actions are directly or indirectly to our benefit and many of them have indeed been essential to the survival of democracy in Europe.

Created: April 9, 2003
Last updated: April 13, 2003