Abu Ghraib art

After Moorishgirl mentioned this show in New York by Colombian artist Fernando Botero, I went there this afternoon.

Although I gather that Botero’s art is viewed as rather overr-rated and unsophisticated by many art critics, this show was well-reviewed in the Nation and The New York Times. In fact, the show has received a lot of attention, so much so that it’s been extended to November 21.

My view may have been colored by the reviews I’d already read, but I found the show very affecting. Botero’s signature style of rendering the human body–slightly inflated, both monumental and toy-like–doesn’t make the figures less real. Rather, it somehow has the effect of making the figures more universal, more human–maybe because the lack of realism allows you to look, again, at what you’ve seen but not wanted to see before.
I think the Nation review is right-on with the observation that the show makes viewers relate to the Iraqis being tortured rather than the Americans doing the torture (they are only present as a boot, a gloved hand at the end of a leash, a stream of piss). Your attention is focused on the details of physical suffering: the tied hands, the knee being bitten by a dog, the blood. These works are about the essence of torture, the physical humiliation and suffering of the human body, and they’re very powerful.

The art isn’t for sale. Botero says he hopes to donate it to a museum.

Rumsfeld immortalized

Portrait of Donald Rumsfeld by Iraqi artist Moayyed Mohsen (see below for the back story):

Iraqi artist paints Rumsfeld gloating over ruins of Iraq

by Asaad Abboud

BAGHDAD, Nov 14, 2006 (AFP) – Moayyed Mohsen likes to paint great figures from Iraq’s past like the mythical hero Gilgamesh. But this year he turned his talents to another larger-than-life subject in his country’s history — Donald Rumsfeld.

Dominating the wall of a Baghdad art gallery in the Sunni neighborhood of Adhamiyah is a massive mural that is no tribute to the outgoing US defense secretary.

Rumsfeld is depicted leaning back reading papers, with combat-boot-clad feet propped up on a ruined building. Beside him is a weathered image of the Lion of Babylon — potent symbol of Iraq’s illustrious past — atop a ruined plinth. The US official is surrounded by whirling bits of paper that morph into birds and fly off into the distance.

The artist’s image is striking and it was conceived in anger — not just over the occupation of Iraq but also over what Mohsen sees as the humiliation of a nation that once taught mankind how to write.

Thanks, Paul!
Continue reading Rumsfeld immortalized

So long, Saddam

Well, there’s at least one item of good news from Iraq: Saddam Hussein has been sentenced to death. Not that the court that tried him can be taken that seriously, or that the offenses he was tried for are particularly important compared the full extent of his crimes, and it is a shame that we won’t have a long look at the document trail of, say, the Western and Arab countries that collaborated with him or armed his regime throughout his reign.

And perhaps there is something to learn from Iraq after all: they will be dispensing of his person by good old fashioned hanging, in my opinion a much more humane way to kill people than the electric chair or gas chamber.

The coup option in Iraq

I don’t believe a coup in Iraq will happen, but it’s interesting that this is being reported — it suggests that there are feelers out there at the very least. (Sorry, no link.)

Oct 23, 2006- United Press International: Coup against Maliki reported in the making

Iraqi army officers are reportedly planning to stage a military coup with U.S. help to oust the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Cairo-based Iraqi and Arab sources said Monday several officers visited Washington recently for talks with U.S. officials on plans for replacing Maliki’s administration by a “national salvation” government with the mission to re-establish security and stability in Iraq.

One Iraqi source told United Press International that the Iraqi army officers’ visit to the United States was aimed at coordinating the military coup in case the efforts of Maliki’s government to restore order reached a dead end.

He said among the prominent officers were the deputy chief of staff, a Muslim Shiite, the intelligence chief, a Sunni, and the commander of the air force, a Kurd. It is believed the three would constitute the nucleus of the next government after the army takes over power.

The proposed plan, according to the source, stipulates that the new Iraqi army, with the assistance of U.S. forces, will take control of power, suspend the constitution, dissolve parliament and form a new government. The military will also take direct control of the various provinces and the administration after imposing a state of emergency.

An Arab source also told UPI that certain Arab countries were informed of the plan and requested to offer their help in convincing the former leaders of the deposed Baath Party regime residing in their countries to refrain from obstructing the move and stop violence perpetrated by the party in Iraq. In return, they will be invited to participate in the government at a later stage.

Washington is becoming increasingly impatient with the failure of Maliki’s government in quelling sectarian violence threatening to plunge Iraq in an all-out civil war.

One possibly related thing I’ve noticed being the US for the past week is that much of the Bush administration’s comments in Iraq revolves around the meme that the Iraqis must now stop the civil war, that things are in the Iraqis hands, etc. Well obviously they are not, things are out of control, and this is just a pre- midterm election attempt to avoid responsibility for the mess that is Iraq. A responsibility, it must be emphasized, rests largely on the current administration, even if there are many other forces at play in Iraq.

I don’t think it could have been predicted three years ago that things would be as bad as to make this kind of reporting from Iraq routine:

OUTSIDE BALAD, Iraq — At midweek, Shiite Interior Ministry commandos and their Shiite militia allies cruised the four-lane hardtop outside the besieged city of Balad, trying to stave off retaliation for a deadly four-day rampage in which they had all but emptied Balad of Sunnis.

Sunni insurgents pouring in to take that revenge patrolled the same highway, driving battered white pickups and minivans, their guns stashed out of sight. Affecting casualness, more Sunni men gathered on rooftops or clustered on the reed-lined edge of the highway, keeping an eye on the Shiite forces and the few frightened civilians who dared to travel the highway past Balad.

What brought this Tigris River city north of Baghdad to this state of siege was a series of events that have displayed in miniature the factors drawing the entire country into a sectarian bloodbath: Retaliatory violence between Sunnis and Shiites has soared to its highest level of the war, increasingly forcing moderates on both sides to look to armed extremists for protection.

The Shiite-led government’s security forces, trained by the United States, proved immediately incapable of dealing with the sectarian violence in Balad, or, in many cases, abetted it, residents and police said.

More than 20,000 U.S. troops are based within 15 miles of Balad, but, uncertain how to respond, they hesitated, waiting for Iraqi government forces to step up, according to residents, police and U.S. military officials.

And all that was left holding Balad, and Iraq, together — the desire for peace and normality still held by the great majority of Iraqis, and the generations of intermarriage and neighborliness between ordinary Shiite and Sunni Muslims — was ripping apart.

I can understand in this context how a return to military dictatorship may seem like a tempting move. I remember Daniel Pipes was advocating that “Iraq needs a strongman” immediately after the invasion. Well I suppose Iraq does if it is going to be a docile client state like Egypt. But at this point, it’s probably already too late to install a military dictator (not to mention this would presumably involve the help of US troops.)

Iraq = Mordor

According to Rick Santorum, anyway:

In an interview with the editorial board of the Bucks County Courier Times, embattled Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum has equated the war in Iraq with J.R.R. Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings.” According to the paper, Santorum said that the United States has avoided terrorist attacks at home over the past five years because the “Eye of Mordor” has been focused on Iraq instead.

“As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else,” Santorum said. “It’s being drawn to Iraq and it’s not being drawn to the U.S. You know what? I want to keep it on Iraq. I don’t want the Eye to come back here to the United States.”

So then Bin Laden is Sauron, Bush is Aragorn, Cheney is Gandalf, Rumsfeld is Gimli and American special forces are hobbits? Hmm, it seems they’re having a hard time finding the One Ring and defeating (even catching) Sauron. Oh, Sam…

Update: Paul sends this pic with the caption “Frodo failed.”

Bushring

Just a passing phase (19)

October 22, 2006

They beat up one of our photographers today.

And smashed his cameras. Now that’s pretty tough – not so much slapping around our photographer and threatening to drag him into a car so that he could join the ranks of nameless corpses, that’s common. But destroying these big clunky professional Canons, with metal frames takes a lot of effort.

Apparently, though, grabbing a camera by its lens and hurling it with all force onto a stone floor, will do the trick.

He was taking pictures of worshippers, something this Shiite photographer does every Friday, but this was a Sunni mosque and this time he didn’t come with the Sunni journalist and he was taking pictures of people’s faces.

Maybe he was going to deliver those pictures to a Shiite death squad, went the thinking.

So the guards grabbed him, hurt him, checked his wallet, and found a few too many pictures of soulful eyed Shiite imams – not too mention the fact that he does have his connections with the Shiite militias, but then you have to if you’re going take pictures out in Sadr City.

They hit him a lot, and were prepared to take him away, when the mosque imam said that actually he had been there just a week before taking pictures with a nice Sunni fellow who was okay in those circles.

If not for that…

So they took is id, no doubt to circulate it around to the wrong people and let him go. Not surprisingly he was a bit put out when he came back to the office. The last time I saw him this furious was when he was going to the hospital to take picture of bomb victims and a photographer from a rival agency had paid off the Shiite militia hospital guards not too let any other photographers in to take pictures and he got shot at.

Photography in Baghdad is a competitive business.

Which isn’t too say we don’t all help each other out. A while back, Reuters wire service reported (correctly) that the Badr Brigade, a Shiite militia, was involved with death squad activity. Apparently that article got translated in Arabic, or someone from Badr was monitoring the English wire because word soon went out that if any of their photographers were seen on the street they would be shot.

So for about a month, our agency shared photos with them. Friend in need and all that.

You see, the thing is, you can cover a war from inside a building, on a desk with a telephone. Not well, but it can be done. You can’t take pictures of it that way. You have to go out there.

The photographers are the unsung heroes, the lions of the bureau. They are the ones who actually go out and roam the streets and actually see what’s happening. Most of the rest of us huddle in our tower and watch it all fall apart from a distance.

When the former photo editor, a portly mustachioed Lebanese fellow, finally left after working Baghdad for most of the past few years, the photographers he’d trained up gave him a little ceremony and plaque. It was quite sweet.

Especially because the guy who organized it clearly was taking his cues from a Baath party farewell ceremony.

In his speech, in Arabic, the photo editor told them, “you are the real AFP, don’t forget it. You are the soul of this bureau.” Interestingly enough, his remarks in English didn’t quite go that way.

We sent some of our Sunnis out to get the photographer’s id back. The mosque guards sort of apologized – you can’t be too careful – and after all, he was taking pictures of people’s faces and maybe he shouldn’t come back to this mosque ever again, hmmm?

But every day, they will still go out and take pictures.

A few weeks earlier, I walked out of a hotel, walked down a darkened street, and walked into a restaurant full of strange people and ordered food. The place was crowded, and a few minute later, two guys I didn’t know sat down at my table.

It’s an innocent and ordinary enough thing to do in most places of the world and, as it turned out, I was in Kurdistan, northern Iraq, and it was pretty safe, but after almost a year of living the unreal life in Baghdad, even something that simple was incredibly difficult.

It’s hard to believe the three northern provinces are part of Iraq – something not lost on the inhabitants – because the streets are full of people just, like, walking, shopping, wandering around… after dark. In the capital Arbil people sit in parks, sip cokes, and watch live music in grassy parks decorated with cheesy, faux Greek columns.

In mountains Dohuk, I found a street with five liquor stores selling beer from Turkey during Ramadan.

I traveled around without a flak jacket or helmet, catching a ride in people’s cars without a bodyguard, interviewing people for a stories as though I was just an ordinary journalist.

I didn’t at first talk with my impromptu dinner companions. I assumed they were Kurdish, and I’d learned pretty early on that many Kurds don’t always feel the need to learn Arabic.

So we ate our meals in silence. The salads, the meat, the tea, the toothpicks. Finally faced with the implacable politeness of the Middle East, one of them had to offer me a cigarette before he smoked one himself.

“Want smoke,” he grunted.

“No smoke,” I grunted back.

“No, I do not smoke,” corrected the other one. There was a pause.

It turned out my two silent dinner companions not only spoke perfect English, but were Iraqi Arabs.

“I thought you were a Turk,” confessed one them, explaining his reticence to talk. “I thought a northern Turk from the way you ate.” What’s wrong with how I eat?

They were refugees, in a way. Educated, cultured multilingual Iraqis who had fled Baghdad when life at home became a pale mockery. Constantly dogged by fear for their families, always home by sunset, living an increasingly closed in life.

They came to Kurdistan so they could hear people play music at night, said one, with a sudden catch in his voice. He described the first time he took his family on a drive around Arbil, after dark. Just driving after sunset was a novelty.

The other one talked about how back in 2001 he took his family up to visit Dohuk, to see the mountains, and then, as night fell, decided it was time to go home and drove the six hours back to Baghdad through the night.

We all chuckled – the thought of driving through central Iraq in the middle of the night was just farcical now.

Kurdistan certainly has its issues. There are two political parties with an intense rivalry, there is corruption in the government, people aren’t happy with their social services and there’s unemployment – but it’s safe.

The Kurds are generally a fiercely proud lot, but they are especially fiercely proud that their areas aren’t the awful disintegrating mess of the rest of the country, it wasn’t always this way.

I spent a fair amount of time with our photographer stringer up there, a Kurd, who back in the 1980s had Egyptian school teachers so we could communicate. He told me about the dark days of the 90s. For most of that decade, rival militias battled it out in the streets of the capital and by nightfall everyone huddled inside and hoped the shooting would end.

“We had our militia phase, maybe the rest of the Iraq will get over its own.”

It’s a nice thought, that maybe it’s just a matter of time before Iraq works its way through this “phase” – sort of like braces or heavy metal music or something.

The word is that tomorrow will be Eid, ending a particularly nasty month of Ramadan here. Except that it won’t be Eid for everyone, Sunni Eid is earlier and the Shiites will do it a few days later.

Today some guy blew himself up on city bus carrying shoppers away from one of the big city markets. People were laden down with bags of children’s toys and clothes to celebrate the end of Ramadan. Four dead, 15 wounded, mostly women and children.

I know this happened because the photographer came back and showed me his pictures of children’s clothes and toys scattered all over the highway.

It’s a bit of a nasty phase.

Blunkett backed strike on Al Jazeera in Baghdad

I haven’t followed this story, but got this in my inbox yesterday from Al Jazeera:

Press Release
For Immediate Release

Al Jazeera Denounces former British Home Secretary’s Statements

DOHA, QATAR – October 18th, 2006: It is with great disappointment that the journalists and staff of Al Jazeera have received statements made recently by former British Home Secretary, David Blunkett. In an interview with Channel Four, Mr Blunkett – who was a member of the war cabinet during the Iraq invasion – admits that he advised Prime Minister Tony Blair to attack Al Jazeera’s Baghdad office.

Mr Blunkett justifies his position by saying that “I don’t think that there are targets in a war that you can rule out because you don’t actually have military personnel inside them if they are attempting to win a propaganda battle on behalf of your enemy.” Al Jazeera Network is outraged at such an attitude toward the free press. We are troubled by the fact that the former Home Secretary’s advice came only two weeks before the actual bombing of Al Jazeera’s Baghdad office, which resulted in the death of our reporter, Tareq Ayoub, and the destruction of our facilities.

As an international news organization, Al Jazeera Network is obliged by law to address its employees’ increasing concerns for their very lives. We find Mr. Blunkett’s allegations and position to be irresponsible and dangerous not only for Al Jazeera but for the freedom of media everywhere in the world. Given the weight of Mr. Blunkett’s statements we strongly urge Prime Minister Blair for a clarification of this matter in alignment with the tenants of freedom and democracy which they advocate. Al Jazeera is in consultation with its lawyers and pursuing next steps in the matter.

What this doesn’t say is whether Blunkett’s advice was heeded by Tony Blair, or whether Blair or Bush personally approved an attack on Al Jazeera’s office in Baghdad, which killed several people.

a plague upon them

One of the little devices that helps me get through the month is ticking up how many stories in the Atlantic Monthly annoy me. When I hit a certain number (yet to be determined), I’m going to cancel my subscription.

This piece scored a tick.

Headlined “Carriers of conflict� it outlines one of the unpleasant side effects of America’s most recent military adventure: the mass movement of people out of Iraq.

Now, there’s some interesting factoids in the piece. 700,000 Iraqi refugees now in Jordan? A quick Google doesn’t make it clear where this number comes from. UNHCR? Right. A year ago apparently they had recognized 800. Last year the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants put the number at 450,000 and noted the inflow was increasing. But anyway, there’s a hell of a lot of them.

The annoying part comes in the intro, where authors Dan Byman and Ken Pollack pontificate on the root cause of instability and violence in the Middle East:

where large numbers of refugees go, instability and war closely follow… Palestinian refugees, who with their descendants number in the millions, have been a source of regional violence and regime change for decades.

Ouch! According to the Byman and Pollock, these wanton troublemakers:

helped provoke the 1956 and 1967 Arab-Israeli wars [then] turned against their hosts and catalyzed a civil war in Jordan (1970–71) and in Lebanon (1975–90) [and, like that wasn’t enough shit disturbing] … contributed to coups by militant Arab nationalists in Egypt, Iraq, and Syria.

Wow. Busy little pests those Palestinians. I think they caused the plumbing in my building to get all gummed up last week as well.

Oddly, Israel is mentioned only once in the discussion of Palestinian refugees (as a victim of Palestinian aggression!) and the US is never mentioned at all in the discussion of Iraqi refugees.

But on second thought, it’s not really odd is it?

Make that two ticks.

Have you served in Iraq?

If you haven’t, go see the film “The Ground Truth,” which interviews some who did. Last night NYU hosted a showing of the film and a presentation from three members of Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW).

The film is mostly a series of interviews with former soldiers in Iraq, all of whom became opposed to the war at some point (many of them after witnessing or participating in the killing of civilians). The film has them recount their experience, from entering the army to being deployed in Iraq, to returning home (several of them injured for life and suffering from really acute PTSD). While the film has a clear agenda, it isn’t strident, and the interviews–the personalities and stories of the soldiers–are so interesting that they carry the whole thing easily. One thing that becomes very clear is that from basic training on (where the soldiers chant songs about “Hajjes” and shoot at “Bin Ladens”) a willful conflation is created between terrorists and Iraqis, or Afghanis, or whoever the army will fight–and that that conflation only gets worse in Iraq and leads almost inevitably to the indiscriminate killing of civilians.

The three veterans, who spoke after the film, were also very compelling. They were all pretty young, two men and a woman, and as far as I remember, two were from the National Guard and one from the Navy.

Several of them talked about how the army had been an economic opportunity for them and also about how the culture of the army had made it very difficult for them to be critical of the war, to speak out, and to ask for conscientious objector status–they said it was seen as a betrayal and a criticism of friends and colleagues.

They also spent some time talking about veteran’s benefits. As Matthew pointed out recently, the number of wounded US soldiers spiked recently. One thing to keep in mind is that “wounded” in Iraq often means losing one or more limbs (basically, losing the part of the body that aren’t protected by body armour). These soldiers come back and face months of red tape to get medical benefits. Also, apparently there is a push to categorize people with PTSD (and one imagines there are many, given the length and strain of current tours of duty) as having “personality disorders” or being “bipolar,” so they won’t get benefits. The government has also cut funding and discouraged doctors from diagnosing TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury)–something that can happen when you are exposed to a lot of explosions.

At one point, a man stood up in the (smallish) audience and said he was a member of the Navy who had served in Iraq and he thought the film was biased. He talked at some length and seemed to me, to be honest, a little strange (although maybe he was just worked up). He said “9/11 was only five years ago, have you forgotten already?” and complained that the film showed the US military in a bad light but didn’t show all the terrible things that “they” (the terrorists) did. He said “Have I seen a lot of action? Definitely. I got more medals than Patton. But I don’t like to talk about it.” He also said, “It was some hardcore shit. We defended American freedom. We were men. We used to hunt those guys down.”

What really impressed me was the reaction of the Veterans Against the War. While the room of NYU students sat in shocked silence and indignation, the veterans responded perfectly: they thanked the man for speaking, thanked him for his service, reiterated the fact that 9/11 was not in fact carried out by Iraqis, reiterated the fact that the insurgency in Iraq is a reaction to US presence there and asked him to come out for a beer after and talk about it all some more. It was a humbling lesson in how to be an effective advocate. If you want to change people’s minds, you have to know how to talk to people you completely disagree with.