Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Among Iraqis, Obama is Not Topic No. 1
Ordinary citizens appear skeptical that the differences between the U.S. presidential candidates have anything to do with them.
BAGHDAD - During his brief visit to Iraq, Barack Obama has been greeted by busloads of Iraqi cameramen vying for shots of his arrivals and departures at meetings with government officials.
But on government-sponsored Al Iraqiya television Monday, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee received second billing to Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's departure for Europe. Only Al Hurra, the U.S.-sponsored channel, led with the story.
The situation has been similar on the streets of Baghdad, where Obama's visit has been duly noted but is not the No. 1 thing on people's minds.
Iraqis tend to be jaundiced about American politics and skeptical that the differences between the presidential candidates have anything to do with them.
"If either McCain or Obama visits Iraq, it would be for campaign purposes, and therefore at this point in time it won't have any effect on the situation in Iraq," said Khalil Ibrahim, 34, a perfume shop owner.
Obama has gained cachet in Iraq with his proposal for a 16-month timetable to withdraw U.S. troops.
Just before his arrival, that plan touched off an international media storm when a German magazine quoted Maliki as saying that period seemed about right, one day after he and President Bush had agreed to a nonspecific "time horizon" for withdrawal.
Maliki's spokesman quickly issued a clarification saying the prime minister had been misquoted and was not endorsing Obama. On Monday, the same spokesman told reporters that Iraq's vision was for withdrawal by the end of 2010.
But the flap hasn't generated much excitement in the streets. Iraqis have more immediate concerns -- and long memories.
"I remember Iraqis being very hopeful that Clinton would lift the sanctions [against then-President Saddam Hussein's regime] when he came to power in the '90s," said truck driver Amer Abdullah, 38. "But history will tell us that this was not the case."
"I just hope that the Iraqi government will have the sense not to shut down streets and enforce a curfew," said clothes vendor Ali Aboud, 26. "That's probably the only effect it could have on us, and it would be devastating."
Aboud thought Obama might be a good candidate for Americans, but he had no preference himself.
"I couldn't care less if either of them visited Iraq," he said. "They [the Americans] practically own this place. They're occupying the country, after all, and besides, they're doing it for their own benefit, not for the Iraqi people."
Iraqis' perceptions of Obama often parallel their own political affiliations and their views on the presence of U.S. troops in the country.
Nassar Rubaie, a member of parliament in the bloc of anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada Sadr, had an especially cynical analysis of the U.S. presidential campaign, characterizing any outcome as nothing more than "tactical change."
"The nature of the U.S. elections will not affect the political situation in Iraq," Rubaie said. "On the other hand, the situation in Iraq has a great effect on the U.S. elections. The candidates are concentrating on the situation in Iraq . . . to win the elections."
A lawmaker from the Kurdish Alliance, Ali Hussein Balo, had the opposite view.
"As Kurds we think that Iraq has been liberated by the Republicans and Bush, so we prefer to continue the same policy to end the problems in Iraq," Balo said
However, ambivalence best describes the feelings of many Iraqis, both in and out of government, about the U.S. military presence.
"I agree that the Iraqi government and its security forces have made lots of progress during the last several months," said Ahmed Adnan, 29, sitting behind the desk of a construction contractor in the Jadriya neighborhood.
"But this tends to be overstated by the media," Adnan said. "I still think that the situation could suddenly revert because Iraq still needs a long time to heal."
© Copyright 2008 Los Angeles Times



33 Comments so far
Show All"But the flap hasn't generated much excitement in the streets. Iraqis have more immediate concerns — and long memories. "I remember Iraqis being very hopeful that Clinton would lift the sanctions..."
What the hell? So, recalling events just 15 years ago that utterly devestated your country, and killed many of your friends and neighbors, is having a "long memory"????
My dear LA Times, not everywhere in the world are people so anesthetatized into a state of corporate media induced, amnesia as amerikkans are!
Obama has gained cachet in Iraq with his proposal for a 16-month timetable to withdraw U.S. troops.
-Not really true because he also has said he will leave an unspecified number of troops there to protect the Green Zone etc. That number will be many tens of thousands. The fighting and the dying will not cease under a Democratic president.
"I couldn't care less if either of them visited Iraq," he said. "They [the Americans] practically own this place. They're occupying the country, after all, and besides, they're doing it for their own benefit, not for the Iraqi people."
-well said Ali Aboud.
"I agree that the Iraqi government and its security forces have made lots of progress during the last several months,"
-progress means: killed a lot of "insurgents" (which is anyone opposed to the illegal and immoral US occupation for the rape and plunder of Iraq's precious oil) and of course, the kid looking out the window and the various groups that were celebrating weddings.
Tailcap, I suggest that you read the article again.
USAn, I think I got it right the first time. I quickly threw something up in the hopes my blog would be first but you beat me. I knew I had a few minutes to go back and edit. Well done!
Iraqis are not dummies. The know their lot will not really improve no matter which pro-war candidate wins. Although the MSM paints Obama as being opposed to the war and for withdrawal that is pure bull. If he were opposed to war he wouldn't vote to fund it. And the story about the 16 month withdrawal is also bull if you read the fine print weasel on his website.
If Obama isn't completely affected by what he sees in Iraq and reverses his position on war, then he truly is the heartless, callous bastard that I think he is.
elmysterio July 22nd, 2008 12:32 pm
"If Obama isn't completely affected by what he sees in Iraq and reverses his position...he truly is the heartless, callous bastard..."
-that and a typical politician who is only concerned with his political fortunes
We see only further obscene wealth re-distribution from people to elites on the chimp's "time horizon". God Bless the Corporation of Psychological Warfare!
The problem is, Obama didn't see what is ACTUALLY occurring in Iraq.
Of course he's not alone there.
Kem: I'm sure you're right about him not actually seeing Iraq... probably did a fly over in a helicopter, and hung around the Green Zone for a bit... What an asshole.
Oh and the other thing... why on earth would ANYONE think that Obama would be "topic #1" in Iraq... give me a break! Talk about arrogance.
The DPAs (Democratic Pastry apologists) are coming....the DPAs are coming...and they will be brandishing the only weapon they have left- lesser-evilism.
They will say a vote against Obama is a vote for McCain.
-so the hell what?
They will claim they are polar opposites which is a crock. Even if they were, they surely aren't when it comes to war. Obama is a hawk on Afghanistan.
To us they isn't that much difference. That's not my fault, that's theirs. Go blame your fortunes on the Democrats. They left us, we didn't leave them.
Besides McCain will accelerate the decline of the militarist empire and Obama's job is to try and rescue it.
Screw them both!
elmysterio wrote: "why on earth would ANYONE think that Obama would be "topic #1″ in Iraq… give me a break! Talk about arrogance."
Spot on. The only reason why it is even a topic is because of MSM 24/7 "newsinfotainment". It is hubris to assume that this senseless and endless "reporting" is of interest to any society that is not yet under the manipulative thumb of the corporate MSM. I am sure that the Iraqis consider electrical power for more than 4 hours/day, clean running water and an operational sewer system to be far more important than an election cycle in the USA, which they correctly see as offering two near-identical candidates. Only in the USA do we "think" there is a difference, because the MSM presents the two candidates as different. Divide and conquer!
I like Mike Whitney's article, "The Democrats are the Problem":
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney07212008.html
"At least Bush never betrayed any of his supporters. Never. Pelosi is worse than Bush, much worse.
And yet, liberals still insist that we should vote the Democratic ticket. In your dreams!"
About as concise as you can make it. As unholy as you may think George Wanker Bush is, he is, if anything, dedicated to meeting the needs of his base. That base is the wealthiest 2% of US citizens, who have done rather well under his leadership. The Democrats talk like they will preserve our rights, ensure good jobs and wages, etc, but they are working for that same 2% that Bush & Co. serve so very well. Voting for Obama will only strengthen Democratic hypocrisy. Sad, very sad.
My vote is going to Ralph Nader.
gus July 22nd, 2008 5:04 pm
"At least Bush never betrayed any of his supporters."
-Nails it!
I strongly suggest that CD cut their use of Large-Circulation Newspapers.
The -apparently- unconscious Imperial Attitude expressed throughout this article I present as evidence.
I mean, yikes.
-matti.
Re: tailcap, elmysterio, KEM PATRICK, et al,
Are these daily anti-Obama tirades tiresome to anyone else?
Who is impressed with this same old seeming invective dished out every single day?
In 3 and 1/2 months the election will be history. Then perhaps we can meet at School of Americas Watch at Fort Benning Nov 22 or 23.
Perhaps Greens and Green Democrats, yes, there are a few besides Kucinich! I'll propose my congressman, Bruce Braley as another example. Perhaps we can build on common ground to resist poverty, racism and militarism. Peace.
why would Iraqis care? They do not get to vote for the people who really control there lives and deaths. No true democracy yet for Iraq.
There was a great documentary on Sundance last nite about the Bolivia election. It followed the corporate candidates and their American handlers, Carville and others.
In essence they suggested that repeating a lie often was much more effective for winning an election than having a few long expositions of the truth.
The Republican shills here seem to know that.
But Evo won regardless.
wc652 said: "Are these daily anti-Obama tirades tiresome to anyone else?"
Ah, just expressing my opinion that Obama is an asshole is all. In fact, I think he's worse than McCain. At least with McCain, you know he's a crazy old psycho... Obama pretends to be 'progressive' yet isn't. Actually... that's a bit of a misnomer... Obama doesn't claim to be progressive... progressives claim Obama to be progressive... out of wishful thinking I would suspect.
Matti Said: "I strongly suggest that CD cut their use of Large-Circulation Newspapers."
Actually, I disagree... it's good to show us what the masses are being fed, so we know what propaganda we have to counter. As well, if you read carefully, you can find little smidgens of truth buried within these MSM articles.
elmysterio at 6:41,
thanks for clarifying.
In a post on another day, I wrote that I cast my first presidential vote for George McGovern, a true progressive! I still revere him.
As you know, he won one state in 1972, and like Al Gore in 2000, did not carry his home state of South Dakota. He lost to Nixon!!
The American electorate, what can I say about the level of our intelligence?
wc652 July 22nd, 2008 6:17 pm writes "Are these daily anti-Obama tirades tiresome to anyone else?"
-It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out: you just don't read them.
How did you all get so smart without reading anything written, edited and/or published by known writers with a background in world affairs and government.
BTW: What are YOU doing for America?
You're looking for the good fairy to wave her magic wand to clear up all the problems you perceive.
I'm glad you're happy with your intelligence quotient. Perhaps you graduated with A's in Self Esteem.
HOWEVER, America has a lot of people with many different takes on any situation anyone cares to name. They say politics is the art of the possible. So all one has to do is select one of the POSSIBLE candidates to back. There won't be much difference between them. Think of the bell-shaped curve.
Also, I too am pretty sick of the diatribe against Obama. He appears to be the best of our choices from where I sit. I'll keep watching and listening.
Apparently there wasn't enough energy on the part of some CD subscribers to get their favorite candidate on either ticket, nor to rally others to their cause. So what do we do when we don't get our way???
Classic red herring. Don't like the truth about Obama, change the subject to the critic. What am I doing for America? I am not running for president.
An attempt is being made to silence criticism of Obama. If you have read so much and are so smart why haven't you figured out you are wasting your time?
As a matter of fact it will be a cinch for you ato answer why the Democrats lead by Obama:
1) Refuse to stop funding the war
2) Refuse to impeach Bush
3) Refuse to hold Bush accountable for torturing
4) Allow right-wingers like Mukasey and others to be confirmed
5) Confirmed right-wingers into the Supreme Court
6) Rubber stamp gargantuan military budgets
7) Allow Bush to spew 935 lies about the war
8) Allow Cheny to out CIA agents and sefy subpoenas
9) Granted Bush and the Telecoms immunity
10) Insert your favorite Democratic Party capitulation here:_____________________
Obama Mobbed By Crowd Of GIs In Baghdad (VIDEO)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/22/obama-greeted-by-cheering_n_114315.html
elmysterio wrote: "why on earth would ANYONE think that Obama would be "topic #1″ in Iraq… give me a break! Talk about arrogance."
To elmysterio and other posters who are making such silly statements, direct me to your sources for statements made by Senator Obama to the effect that he is/wants to be should be the "topic #1" in Iraq. I do read a lot but seems to have missed him making these kinds of comments.
lobster July 22nd, 2008 7:20 pm
How did you all get so smart without reading anything written, edited and/or published by known writers with a background in world affairs and government.
-gee I have no idea, let me pinch myself!
All you people keep talking about the PROGRESS in Iraq, but I would like to judge for myself with stats on electricity, clean water, water treatment, unemployment and not just less killings! Progress would be noted if I could see a Blackwater contractor put on trial.
Here's that interview with al-Maliki:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,566852,00.html
Alan, I second that. It's easy for the war-profiteering hypocrites to pretend everything is just fine in Iraq since they don't live there.
The Germans are all excited about Obama like he's a rock star because he's young compared to McCain and is black. I hope he's not "black" like Condi Rice, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell, Alan Keyes, etc., etc.
SamW said: "To elmysterio and other posters who are making such silly statements"
Ummm... the bloody title of the article is Obama is Not Topic No.1... come on buddy, use your brain. sheesh.
Why would the Iraqis, or any Arab country for that matter, get excited about another American politician who kisses Israel's arse?
I wonder if Obama is using good strategy by trying to beef-up his image as a good Commander-in-Chief? That is certainly not what attracted me to his campaign. I saw him not as a CIC, but as a diplomat willing to change American foreign policy, calm down the Indians, and get us the hell out of the ME.
Now, I see him as playing Warrier Chief and continuing on in the ME both in Iraq and Afghanistan and even Iran if they don't behave. First it will be 2 more brigades, then 3, then a surge when we get bogged down. By that time it will be time for reelection and some new bozo will try to con us. It is special interests I tell you -- do it there way or not at all.