The Press and the so-called US Troop Withdrawal from Iraq

As the nation gets ready to listen to President Obama tonight explain the US “withdrawal” from Iraq, the Grand Rapids Press has run a story on that theme.

Entitled, “Grand Rapids area residents who lost loved ones in Iraq war glad to see troops leave,” the story continues to read like so much of the coverage on Iraq over the past 8 years.

Press reporter Ted Roelofs talked to 3 military families and one Cascade Township resident about their thoughts on the US invasion/occupation of Iraq. The military families have mixed feelings, but primarily think that what their family members were doing in Iraq was noble.

The Cascade Township resident says he thinks the war in Iraq was a big mistake and  “it hasn’t been worth the blood and it hasn’t been worth the dollars.” The Press article provides the cost in “blood” by giving the number of US soldiers who died in Iraq (4000 plus), but never mentions the number of Iraqi deaths, which some sources put at 1,366,350.

The Press reporter does not pursue the monetary cost of the war in Iraq, which according to the National Priorities Project is $744 billion and counting. Even this number could be considered low, since it does not factor in the costs at home because of the war. Economist Joseph Stiglitz estimates the costs to the US are more accurately estimated around $3 Trillion.

It should be noted that the Press does not speak to any of the number of individuals and organizations that have been resisting the US invasion/occupation of Iraq over the past 8 years, ever since the build up to war in the fall of 2002. Just because there is one person who says it was a policy mistake doesn’t provide balance, especially since that source also said that getting rid of Saddam was a good thing and that, “We have created a power vacuum that is very likely going to be filled by the Islamist fundamentalists.”

Continuing the Government View on Iraq

Beyond the limited perspectives in this story, what is really problematic about this Press article is that it continues to present the US invasion/occupation from the point of view of the US government.

As we have documented in numerous studies of local news coverage since 2002, others have documented that the national US news media has more or less embraced the US government propaganda on the US invasion/occupation of Iraq (see When Media Goes to War, by Anthony DiMaggio). It is incredible on one level that the major US media has accepted government propaganda on Iraq, but even more incredible since the whole WMD lie has been exposed.

This Press article continues with the line of propaganda, even though it may appear to have multiple views on this topic. The way that the article is framed is both simplistic and ultimately vindicates US policy towards Iraq over the past 8 years. The most only criticism provided in the story was that it was a mistake. By framing it as a mistake, the Press fails to avoid what the rest of the world pretty much feels, which is that the US invasion/occupation was both illegal and immoral.

Framing at as a mistake or taking at face value the comments of military families who think that what their sons/husbands did was honorable means we don’t have to seriously evaluate or come to terms with the motives/intent of the policy and its last legacy.

As many writers and analysts have demonstrated, the US invasion/occupation of Iraq has all along been about dominating Iraq’s oil resources, having permanent US military bases in a country that borders Iran and restructuring Iraq’s economy to fit the larger neo-liberal agenda. (See War Without End: The Iraq War in Context, The Shock Doctrine and Failed States: The Abuse of Power and the Assault on Democracy.)

The legacy of the 7-plus years of the US occupation is still unfolding, but we do know that the human and economic cost to Iraq and Iraqis has been tremendous. In an article by Patrick Cockburn, one of the few un-embedded reporters in Iraq, Cockburn identifies some of the ongoing violence as a result of the US occupation and which sectors of Iraqi society the US has backed.

The Press article is meant to put a local spin on the recent announcement by the Obama administration that its promise of troop withdrawal is going as planned. However, as many writers have pointed out, the US occupation is being rebranded since there will be at least 50,000 US troops remaining in Iraq, advisors, an increase in the amount of private military contractors (paid for by US tax dollars) and no intention of dismantling the numerous US bases that play such a vital role in determining US hegemony in the region.

There is certainly a great deal of things that one could point to in terms of the “failures” with the US occupation of Iraq, but one area that we must recognize is the role that the US commercial news media has played and continues to play in misinforming the American public.