The Korean Wall shows the vast difference between two halves of the same (former) country that are in stark contrast to each other. The “purported” wall has done little more than to keep half of the country under a repressive dictatorship with a poor track record on human rights.
Similarly, the Berlin Wall showed a stark contrast between one half of the country, which was in substantially better shape economically (and many would say politically as well) than the other.
We could also discuss Israel’s “security fence”, but there are a few stickier items there, so I will just leave it at that. The bottom line is that the main accomplishment and track record of creating fences and walls is that, at best, one “side” is repressed socially and economically, and nothing gets “resolved”.
The “Baghdad” wall, regardless of whether it gets built or whether the Iraqis put a stop to it (since it is their country and they don’t want it), is a symbol of the colossal failure of the invasion and occupation. It is yet another example of the exact wrong approach to trying to quell the massive violence that is a daily occurrence. It shows, yet again, a complete lack of understanding of the situation on the ground, the negative short term and long term impact it will have on Baghdad and the country in general, that the administration thinks that the escalation is failing, and that they are throwing up their hands.
It is not a solution – not even a short term one. It is a symbol that this administration has given up. That they do not care at all. That nothing – not even the vaunted escalation is remotely working. This signifies a tremendous failure – just the latest in a long string of tremendous failures in Iraq.
From the NY Times article (linked above):
The American military said in a written statement that “the wall is one of the centerpieces of a new strategy by coalition and Iraqi forces to break the cycle of sectarian violence.”
- Wasn’t the “Baghdad offensive” last July supposed to break the cycle of sectarian violence?
- Wasn’t 20,000 additional troops this past January supposed to be enough security to break the cycle of sectarian violence?
- Wasn’t a heavily fortified “Green Zone” supposed to keep the violence out?
- Wasn’t firebombing Fallujah in 2004 supposed to break the cycle of sectarian violence?
- Weren’t the multiple raids on houses supposed to quell the sectarian violence?
- What about the hundreds of bodies found in the streets every single day
- What about the increased bombings since the escalation began?
- What about the US troops being killed at the highest rate over the past six months since the invasion began?
- What about the Sunnis kicking Shiites out of their houses and neighborhoods and vice versa? I guess that didn’t keep each of the sects from fighting.
- What about the curfews that were repeatedly imposed?
Nothing this administration has done has come even close to stopping the violence. And how do the Iraqis feel about this wall?
The wall has already drawn intense criticism from residents of the neighborhood, who say that it will increase sectarian tensions and that it is part of a plan by the Shiite-led Iraqi government to box in the minority Sunnis.
A doctor in Adhamiya, Abu Hassan, said the wall would transform the residents into caged animals.
“It’s unbelievable that they treat us in such an inhumane manner,” he said in a telephone interview. “They’re trying to isolate us from other parts of Baghdad. The hatred will be much greater between the two sects.”
“The Native Americans were treated better than us,” he added.
Do they NOT think that this will increase hatred towards our troops?
Do they NOT think that this will increase violence towards our troops?
Do they NOT think that our already overextended and underequipped troops DON’T know this?
This shows, yet again, that the Bush administration has no clue as to what they are doing. It shows that they don’t see the obvious ramifications of yet another tremendously stupid idea. It shows that, once again, they are not learning from history. It shows they have given up – that they are literally out of ideas and don’t even care enough to try and think of something original or with a remote chance of success.
It shows that they are doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results. It shows they are insane.
also in orange
I’m not quibbling with your overall argument — walls are bad policy.
However, I’ve never heard of a “Korean wall.” The DMZ is a strip of land many miles wide across the width of the Korean peninsula. Far from “demilitarized,” it remains some of the most militarized acreage on the planet. But I seriously doubt there is a concrete wall akin to the Berlin wall that stretches 240 kilometers yet is cleverly hidden from view from the South Korean side.
Your link is to a wikipedia page that says that North Korea claims this wall exists. I think we can thus safely conclude that no such wall exists.
The DMZ most definitely DOES exist, and it has tragically divided a nation for half a century now. But this is a very different situation from the ones you are comparing it to, in which one side unilaterally throws up a physical barrier. The wall dividing the Korean peninsula is political, economic, and above all military in nature — not concrete and barbed wire.
I replied at Kos to the same comment. See reply there.
sorry, no. Orange doesn’t need the hits. Too much trouble to cut and paste?
…is what the Administration is now left with. The worst thing – and gawd there are so many bad things that coming up with the worst is tough work indeed – is that even though (like McNamara and Johnson), they KNOW the game is up. They can’t repair the damage they’ve done. They can’t tamp down the violence, stop the civil war, or even do more than a half-assed job at protecting U.S. troops. And yet, just like LBJ and McNamara, they keep going, even sending more troops into the grinder. I keep trying to come up with a word for that. It’s definitely not stupidity because that lets them off the hook.
Good Diary.
“megalomania” works..
But don’t kid yourself; stopping the war is about the last thing the Shrubberies want.
If they could cut the press coverage, or the US casualty count, that might be politically a bit helpful… but as soon as the war dies, the Iraqis are going to elect a government that’s going to want its country back, and at THAT point the game is up.
Until then, and as long as we can keep it stirred up, we can strengthen our position and our bases and make it harder and harder for them to get rid of us.
It’s mostly a “play for time” game right now. If we can keep things chaotic until we have four finished fortresses (five, counting the embassy) with a regiment of troops and a couple of wings of fighter-bombers and Aparches in each one, we’re there forever, and we’ll control the entire region.
Iraq is well on its way to being FOB Iraq, and the home base for operation “OUR OIL” for the indefinite future.
Iraqi Premier Orders Work Stopped on Wall
So much for this “centerpiece of a new strategy by coalition and Iraqi forces”.