Back to Metroland's Home Page!
 Columns & Opinions
   The Simple Life
   Comment
   Reckonings
   Opinion
   Myth America
   Letters
   Poetry
 News & Features
   Newsfront
   F.Y.I.
   Features
 Dining
   This Week's Review
   The Dining Guide
   Leftovers
 Cinema & Video
   Weekly Reviews
   The Movie Schedule
 Music
   Listen Here
   Live
   Recordings
   Noteworthy
 Arts
   Theater
   Dance
   Art
   Classical
   Books
   Art Murmur
 Calendar
   Night & Day
   Event Listings
 Classifieds
   View Classified Ads
   Place a Classified Ad
 Personals
   Online Personals
   Place A Print Ad
 AccuWeather
 About Metroland
   Where We Are
   Who We Are
   What We Do
   Work For Us
   Place An Ad

Rally Recipe Wins No Prizes

It was, as the saying goes, all good. The weather was great. The crowd was pissed but in a cheerful, spirited way. The Washington, D.C. cops, though fully in thrall to their Powellesque doctrine of completely unnecessary and overwhelming force, more or less just lined up in their cruisers, saddles, motorcycles, dirt bikes, bicycles and black boots and watched the proceedings. The ANSWER coalition and United for Peace and Justice had obviously mended fences after some squabbles earlier in the year.

In fact, except for its totally unfocused message and the fact that organizers missed a golden opportunity by not holding it three weeks earlier, the anti-war rally on Saturday was a tremendous success.

The crowd of 10,000 to 20,000 had gathered ostensibly to register their disapproval of the Bush administration’s handling of the war in Iraq.

It is always good to see people fired up about something and doing something about that something; it’s even better when that something is the Bush administration’s voluminous catalog of misdeeds, missteps and misstatements of the truth. But if anyone—say, a Democratic party strategist—wanted to gain some understanding of the hurdles faced by the left between now and November 2004, this would have been the place to be.

The first thing such an observer might have noticed is that the rally’s message was an omnibus, diffuse expression of dissatisfaction on many fronts. This was a cupboard casserole of a demonstration, thrown together with whatever was on hand. The main ingredients were “end the occupation now” (mushroom soup),”Bush is a liar who should be impeached” (noodles) and “bring our troops home safely” (tuna fish). A fairly harmonious combination, enhanced by “Dude, Where’s My Country?” (salt) and “Osama bin forgotten” (pepper).

Unfortunately, other, less compatible, ingredients worked their way in: “support to the Palestinians” (beets), “no to the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas” (pickle relish) and “does your food have a face?” (Apple Jacks). These points of view were expounded both by speakers and the placard-bearers in the crowd, to the detriment of the rally at large; worthy though each may be, their addition confused the message hopelessly and probably made it just a little too easy for anyone peering out the windows of the West Wing to dismiss the whole crowd as a bunch of wackos.

Granted, a rally like this is tough to pull off. In the run-up to the war, it was easy to gather people for the no-invasion-of-Iraq cause. This was much trickier. Occupation is more abstract, and it doesn’t come with the same package of grisly images that war does.

However, our fictitious political operative might have seized on another, more fundamental, problem than that the demonstration-as-casserole tasted weird. The real problem is that the base ingredient, the mushroom soup—”end the occupation now”—is basically void of nutritional content.

“Ending the occupation now” is not just an idea that will never see fruition; it’s a bad, irresponsible, naïve one that would have disastrous consequences. Many of us think the United States never should have invaded Iraq. Now that it has done so—and yanked out the indigenous civil administration by its roots, fired the entire army and left Sunni snarling at Shiite and vice-versa—someone has to stay until the Iraqis are on their feet. That means a civil service that can make sure the 60 percent of Iraqis who were fully dependent on U.N. food aid before the war get food, water and power. That means a national police force that can keep score-settling, theft, abductions and rape in check. That means a parliamentary structure that is representative enough and acceptable enough to citizens that they will allow differences to be settled in the political arena and not the streets.

And this is where the organizers’ great missed opportunity comes in. This demonstration should have taken place three Saturdays earlier, prior to the U.N. resolution that passed Oct. 15. And instead of calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops, demonstrators should have thrown their weight behind U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s proposal that the Coalition Provisional Authority give a “greater role” to the United Nations, and, more importantly, set up a process for establishing an Iraqi government similar to the one put in place in 2001 for Afghanistan.

That plan would have provided the cover needed to get international peacekeepers in, which would have made U.S. withdrawal more of a possibility. Such a multinational force would have filled the absolute requirement for a stabilizing force to keep at bay the worst human impulses while Iraqis set about the business of rebuilding their government. One need only look at Afghanistan—where the government has been politely screaming for more peacekeepers to quell warlords, marauding militias and common criminals—to see what happens when no one is around to make certain elements of society behave.

More importantly, Annan’s plan would have set up a provisional, broadly representative Iraqi government within three to five months and handed power to it right away. This government would have started drafting a constitution on a timetable that would allow for some deliberation, with national elections to follow. Iraqis would have had time to decide what they want and do it correctly. It’s more or less the Afghanistan model, which left two and a half years between the installment of the provisional government and first national elections—and even that is not seeming like enough time.

What the United States wanted, and got, was the opposite: It will not hand over power to the Iraqis until they have a constitution and national elections; this condition will rush both processes. There have been rumblings from the administration about elections by the end of next year—hardly enough time to make the psychological, much less political, shift from life in a totalitarian state to democratic self-rule.

Annan’s plan died a too-early death, replaced by a watered-down Franco-Russo-German version that failed anyway. Twenty-thousand demonstrators carrying “U.S. Out, U.N. In” signs—instead of the lone soul I saw doing so on Saturday—might not have won the day, but at least they would have been rallying behind a single compelling idea that would have produced progress instead of mayhem. That kind of demonstration could have been a powerful show of unity that showed progressives as a discerning group grounded in political realities. And all would have been spared picking through that bizarre casserole in search of something substantial.

—Traci Hukill


Send A Letter to Our Editor
Back Home
   
Click here for your favorite eBay items
$14.95 domain registration
In Association with Amazon.com
0100_001E
promo 120x60
offer02_120x90
120x60 Up to 25% off
 
Copyright © 2002 Lou Communications, Inc., 4 Central Ave., Albany, NY 12210. All rights reserved.