Iraq is still a disaster, and three years on, purely for domestic consumption, the US administration is still lying about it, writes Ramzy Baroud* To their credit, top Pentagon officials cautioned journalists and the public from the early days of the Iraq war that the dissemination of misinformation would be a vital weapon in their arsenal. Needless to say, they have held true to their word. But what the mainstream media -- seemingly little alarmed by the administration's clear intent to supply journalists with false information -- is neglecting to convey is the fact that misinformation is still, three years on, the name of the game for the US government, its well-paid experts and media allies. The fact is that the administration's propaganda machine has hardly paused since the historic, albeit staged, toppling of Saddam's statue near the Palestine Hotel 9 April 2003. A renowned journalist and a trusted colleague of mine was, among others, witness to the intricate pre-toppling show. "It was all an act," he declared as we dined in a Seattle restaurant days upon his return from Iraq, nearly three years ago. His reports, however, failed to make mention of that seemingly relevant point. "The End of a Tyrant", was more or less the flashing headline everywhere. To achieve its objectives, the advancing US military started a makeshift Arabic radio station near Baghdad's airport, made possible with the cooperation of Arab broadcasters seeking a quick buck. Meanwhile, millions of fliers descended upon weary Iraqis throughout the country, urging them to give up the fight if they wanted a better future for their children: that of freedom, democracy and an end to their suffering. Though access to electricity and clean water are still major challenges facing ordinary Iraqis to this day, over three years later, US media specialists in hushed, yet official, cooperation with a Lebanese television station took on the task of converting Iraq's primary television station from the seat of Baath Party doctrine to the font of American propaganda in a matter of weeks. Saddam himself would be shocked to realise that his well- knitted, decades-old media apparatus still had room for improvement. Military strategists doubtless would defend state-sponsored half-truths and misinformation in times of war as a justifiable war tactics. Not only did they bring a quick end to the war -- or so it seems -- but they also helped minimise American causalities. Things, however, have hardly changed since those early days, though the situation on the ground has been fundamentally altered. The Pentagon's latest figures have put America's dead at over 2,500, while the number of wounded has passed the 18,000 mark. The post-Vietnam War experience can tell us a great deal about the physiological scars that wars inflict, and nothing can heal. Moreover, the harm, even debilitation, caused by the US army's use of depleted uranium requires another article, if not its own volume. That this war will wreak long- lasting effects is a fact, not speculation. Considering the devastating outcome of 's military adventurism in Iraq, one would imagine that sincerity and transparency are required now more than ever before; after all, there seems to be no particular enemy to baffle: Saddam Hussein is in prison, the so- called insurgency has no central command, thus no central strategy -- a fact that renders state propaganda ineffective, if necessary at all. Moreover, the campaign of lies and deceit cannot possibly be targeting the Iraqi people for they were never taken into consideration since the systematic campaign of sanctions started in 1991, which killed -- according to the most modest estimates -- nearly one million persons, mostly children. The daily and wholesale murder, organised torture and Haditha-like executions are but further illustration that the US cares less about Iraq hearts and minds. So it's clear that US state propaganda -- aided and abetted by a cooperative, supine mainstream "liberal" media -- has but one primary target: the American public. For without their full indoctrination and consequent blind support, military adventurism can be a huge political burden; coupled with a dwindling economy and mounting debt, it could sway the political pendulum to unfavourable directions. Indeed, the recent announcement of the killing of Al-Qaeda's supposed strongman in Iraq, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, has unleashed a major PR campaign by the Republican president to reclaim some of his lost credibility among Americans. To save a possible major setback to the Republican Party in the November elections -- and considering that his faltering ratings stand at an all time low -- President 's camp is turning the inconsequential death of Zarqawi into a major turning point in Iraq. Though the president insists that Zarqawi's death doesn't mean an end to violence in Iraq (a clever attempt to avoid another "mission accomplished" faux pas), the PR campaign led by his administration immediately after the Jordanian militant's death suggests a desperate, yet determined, attempt at political recovery. Otherwise, how else can one explain the timing of the following events: 's "surprise" visit to Iraq; the announcement of a major military "sweep" meant to parade the US- trained Iraqi military and police as a strong "partner" in quelling the insurgency; the Iraqi government's announcement that "this is the beginning of the end" for Al-Qaeda in Iraq; the call for "national reconciliation" and the release of a few hundred Iraqi prisoners; President 's two- day retreat at Camp David to consult with his advisors -- sold by CNN as the president's way of sharing the burden of war responsibility with the people -- and so on and so forth. Meanwhile, reality on the ground suggests that if Zarqawi's death was of any value, it freed the Iraqi resistance from its burdensome affiliation with a foreign leadership. Aside from that, nothing has changed: bombs continue to blast throughout the country; tortured and mutilated bodies continue to appear daily in ditches and alleyways; gun battles persist almost hourly; new militant groups with confusing names spring forth unabashed, etc. Post-invasion Iraq has not changed and is unlikely to change anytime soon, even if the new Iraqi prime minister has finalised his cabinet and has made an impressive speech or two. Well done. What began as a focussed campaign of misinformation aimed at defeating Saddam's forces has turned into a much more intense campaign of deceit and trickery aimed at salvaging 's political reputation and that of his Republican Party. Thus, what has really changed in Iraq is that the administration and the media have suddenly decided to reinterpret the ongoing conflict for political ends. It has little to do with Baghdad and its Green Zone and much to do with Capitol Hill and its discontented politicians. Simply put: it's politics as usual. * The writer is an Arab-American journalist.
