And Now the Library
Comments: 19
This is just insane. I must say, I’m having a really hard time understanding this.
The final chapter of the sacking of Baghdad
Robert Fisk, Independent.co.uk [via BookNotes]When I caught sight of the Koranic library burning flames 100 feet high were bursting from the windows I raced to the offices of the occupying power, the US Marines’ Civil Affairs Bureau. An officer shouted to a colleague that “this guy says some biblical [sic] library is on fire”. I gave the map location, the precise name in Arabic and English. I said the smoke could be seen from three miles away and it would take only five minutes to drive there. Half an hour later, there wasn’t an American at the scene and the flames were shooting 200 feet into the air.
I know no one at the top level of the current US administration could be considered a particularly cultured person (hell, the ‘President’ is basically illiterate, right?), and that there even seems to be antipathy towards any sort of intellectual activity. And I understand how the incredible logistical challenge of invading a country limits how many people you have available for policing. And, yes, it’s absolutely mystifying that Iraqis would ransack and burn their own museums and libraries, and the speed with which they did so is shocking.
But here’s the deal: going into this invasion, the U.S.-led coalition must have known that a lot of very fucking important artefacts and documents would be, at least to some extent, at risk. This realisation confers a responsibility. The U.S.-led coalition seems not only to have failed to give any thought to this situation, but to have failed to respond in situ when opportunities arose to do something about the destruction.
As I say, I’m having a hard time with this so don’t expect rational arguments from me. I guess Bush and company can be happy that their war finally achieved something that will keep it in the history books for a long time to come.
Updated: Garret posted links on dangerousmeta to a couple of additional stories that ratchet up the horror a few degrees:
Pentagon knew of museum risk
Guy Gugliotta, The Telegraph – CalcuttaIn the months leading up to the Iraq war, US scholars repeatedly urged the defence department to protect Iraq’s priceless archaeological heritage from looters, and warned specifically that the National Museum of Antiquities was the single most important site in the country.
Late in January, a mix of scholars, museum directors, art collectors and antiquities dealers asked for and were granted a meeting at the Pentagon to discuss their misgivings. McGuire Gibson, an Iraq specialist at the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute, said yesterday that he went back twice more, and he and colleagues peppered defence department officials with e-mail reminders in the weeks before the war began.
US accused of plans to loot Iraqi antiques
Liam McDougall, Sunday heraldIt has emerged that a coalition of antiquities collectors and arts lawyers, calling itself the American Council for Cultural Policy (ACCP), met with US defence and state department officials prior to the start of military action to offer its assistance in preserving the country’s invaluable archaeological collections.
The group is known to consist of a number of influential dealers who favour a relaxation of Iraq’s tight restrictions on the ownership and export of antiquities. Its treasurer, William Pearlstein, has described Iraq’s laws as ‘retentionist’ and has said he would support a post-war government that would make it easier to have antiquities dispersed to the US.
•••
Posted to Oh, the Humanity • 2003.04.16 (Wed) • 09:57
Comments
Posted by kara 2003.04.16, 10:30
interesting and sad how you bash Bush and company yet say nothing about the people who actually did the looting and destruction.
Posted by Gary Santoro / Mediaburn 2003.04.16, 10:41
Bush deserves bashing. Washington was advised to protect the Antiquities museum by the University of Chicago. If the US is supposed to be there to help the Iraqi people have a better life, and to rebuild the economy, the failure to protect these resources is a failure of the mission. Of course we knew that low-life theives will try to steal. That’s obvious. It easily could have been prevented with perhaps a dozen soldiers.
Posted by Buzz Andersen 2003.04.16, 10:43
“Basically illiterate?” Give me a break. I agree with your point that law and order has not been properly maintained, and that the US bears some responsibility for this, but the fact that you resort to ad-hominem epithets with very little substance does nothing to bolster your argument.
Would it be acceptable if the US, in justifying the war, had made arguments against the Iraqi regime that were based in anti-Arab stereotypes? I think not. Therefore, let’s try to avoid the “Bush is stupid” stereotype as an all-purpose anti-war argument.
Posted by James B. 2003.04.16, 10:54
what part of “I’m having a hard time with this so don’t expect rational arguments from me” was vague buzz? Jeremy is (rightly so) venting at the grand stupidity of all of this. Like him I’m a great lover of knowledge and it’s almost scary the rage something like this makes me feel. Humanities best and only real hope to become a better thing is through knowledge and history, and when a loss as great as this occurs, a sense of regret and anger is damn justified.
As to the presidents intelligence, basically illiterate is an exaggeration, but frankly is partly justified. Hell, I got higher SAT scores then that guy. God knows I shouldn’t be running the country and neither should someone as obviously ill suited as he. It’s not a republican thing, it’s not a democrat thing, it’s an “oh good god is this guy nuts?!” thing.
Or something to that affect.
Posted by Buzz Andersen 2003.04.16, 11:12
Well, James, you’re right: this is his weblog and he can say what he wants. And I don’t really disagree with the point—I am perfectly willing to accept the argument that Rumsfeld (a man I am certainly no a fan of) undercommitted ground troops, didn’t make policing a priority, etc. I have a New Yorker subscription and can parrot the party line just like everybody else.
However, it touches a nerve with me when people play the “Bush is stupid” card. He’s certainly no intellectual, but he’s not as stupid as people make out either. I’m really tired of people comparing their own IQs/SAT scores/vocabularies/etc. to that of the President—as if we are supposed to tabulate the nation’s test results and put the person with the highest score in charge. To me, this makes about as much sense as writing to Parade Magazine columnist Marilyn Vos Savant for moral advice (as people frequently seem to). Being good at brain teasers does not automatically translate into good leadership skills.
I really need to stop responding to things like this, though—it only gets me angry and convinces all of the weblog sophisticates that I’m a boorish, ugly American.
Posted by Sarah 2003.04.16, 11:17
I think where ever you go in the world, if a breakdown in law and order occured, there would be some people who would take the opportunity to do violent and destructive things.
This is not the Iraqi people doing this, it is some Iraqi people. And it is the responsibility of the occupying forces to prevent it happening. They have failed miserably.
Posted by James B. 2003.04.16, 11:42
My problem with Bush has always been less about his intelligence (I only mentioned it since it was a point of contention) and more his personal ethical system, which in my own personal opinion isn’t so hot. Your very right in that SAT’s aren’t a good ruler by which to measure the man, but in combination with several other factors, I just can’t speak very highly of him… or for that matter most politicians on either side of the fence.
I just think no one in power gives a damn about the Iraqi people or their history.
Posted by jh 2003.04.16, 12:00
Kara —- “interesting and sad how you bash Bush and company yet say nothing about the people who actually did the looting and destruction.”
Read the post. I said, “And, yes, it’s absolutely mystifying that Iraqis would ransack and burn their own museums and libraries, and the speed with which they did so is shocking.”
I don’t have any insight into why this happened. Certainly it happened with an unexpected ferocity, but my point is that this shouldn’t be used as an excuse for the failure to protect the collections.
Buzz —- “… the fact that you resort to ad-hominem epithets with very little substance does nothing to bolster your argument.”
You’re perfectly right. I spoke out of stupefied anger.
“Would it be acceptable if the US, in justifying the war, had made arguments against the Iraqi regime that were based in anti-Arab stereotypes? I think not. Therefore, let’s try to avoid the ‘Bush is stupid’ stereotype as an all-purpose anti-war argument.”
I’ll cop to your first point, but not this. I wasn’t employing anti-American stereotypes in any sense, nor was I making an anti-war argument. I was making a specific point about the lack of concern for cultural and intellectual life shown by the current administration and what I believe to be an astonishing dereliction of responsibility, which I then sabotaged by resorting to an ad hominem attack on Bush.
Perhaps Bush isn’t functionally illiterate, but he’s obviously not much of a reader. Now, we can debate whether the developed sense of history, of psychology, of law, of human affairs in general (to use a catchall) that can be developed in the well-read should be part of the job description of ‘Leader of the Free World’ or not, but I think it’s been made perfectly clear that George W. Bush is not inclined to this direction regardless of its importance.
Fears of a Chauncey Gardner presidency should be very real at this point.
Posted by Buzz Andersen 2003.04.16, 12:09
James, Point well taken. I shouldn’t have made such a big deal about it, since it wasn’t really the main point of the post.
This war is, as the British say, doing my head in. I really, really want to support my country and its administration, but I admit they have often make it extraordinarily difficult. It seems that every good deed we do must be negated by a complete disaster. I’m already dreading the post war period, with its attendant conflicts of interest. If I responded to this post harshly, it is probably because of my own severe cognitive dissonance right now.
I think I’ll go back to being a programmer now.
Posted by Buzz Andersen 2003.04.16, 12:33
Jeremy, I agree, of course—the Bush administration’s lack of sensitivity (which often seems willful) can be mind-boggling. I won’t even try to defend them on that point—unfortunately, I just can’t :-(.
As for the accusation of stereotyping, I suppose that was a little overblown, and I do apologize. It often seems to me that the common view of Bush as stupid and arrogant is related to the pervasive stereotype of him as a “cowboy,” but you could also argue that it has a lot to do with his own lack of, shall we say, verbal grace.
Well, I’ve backtracked enough for one evening. I think I’ll go to sleep before I get myself into any more trouble :-).
Posted by pete 2003.04.16, 18:36
you can’t blame the americans for this.
a country that has so little history itself cannot comprehend that vast history that other nations have.
it means little to a marine on the ground that such a place is burning when they are so intent on killing allies (whoops, I mean civilians, (whoops, I mean terrorists), (whoops, I mean… actually, I don’t know what I mean, and neither do they, it seems))) (sorry, can’t help myself - maybe I suffer too - see below)
bush said yesterday, “there is no list, and Syria’s not on it”. Highly educated then…
Buzz: “I agree, of course–the Bush administration’s lack of sensitivity (which often seems willful) can be mind-boggling.”
Mate, the US administration suffers with a rare form of political Turettes Syndrome. I’m sick of watching American politicians on the news getting annoyed because reporters dare to pose questions that actually question whats going on. People get like that when their lies are questioned - unexpected aggressive beheviour…
bugger it, i could go on for hours…
Posted by iggy 2003.04.16, 20:03
Whatever the truth of these rumors, Bush’s conflict of interest problems tend to encourage their dispersion. The loss of the national archives will mean that the history of this whole episode may never be properly written: there’s a temptation to read intentionality into that as well, although Marines are saying, “We just don’t have enough people to keep order.” The story of the Marine who responded to the reporter’s frantic warning with “”this guy says some biblical [sic] library is on fire” made me feel sick and ashamed of the cultural ignorance of my compatriots.
We promised to protect the infrastructure of this nation. That apparently means that precious Koranic scholarship can burn while oil facilities are well-guarded and secured. This will anger Muslims more deeply than you can imagine.
Posted by Gavin Bell 2003.04.16, 22:37
The destruction of the history of our collective civilisation is both powerful and sad. Pete, to say the this is not the Americans fault is not really true, people in America didn’t just pop into existance 200 years ago, they have a heritage that goes back to other places, they can conceive of a history before america. Maybe this doesn’t go back 8000 years or so, but they were briefed and had plenty of tanks, 10-15 outside the library, museums would have protected these places. Powell has offered to fix it though, pity it happened in the first place. Showing off to the world’s press outside the Palestine hotel has a sense of Nero about it.
Posted by Both Sides 2003.04.17, 00:30
Posted by Thank You Both Sides 2003.04.17, 01:56
It’s about time someone puts some sense into this non-sense.
Posted by Anonymous 2003.04.21, 08:40
From that article that “puts some sense into this non-sense” -> “Iraq’s cash crop is the black gold they’re sitting on, not some rocks in a museum,” and right after: “I understand the damage historically.” A little contradictory isn’t it? Bush being stupid a stereotype? It’s more like an euphemism… Just look at his face, the only thing that could prevent you from noticing he’s a total retard would be that you’re too proud to admit that your own country has a dictator in the White House and/or too lazy to do anything about it… Why people become so naive when it comes down to their own Country? Yeah, sure… some random Iraqis did the job and it’s just a coincidence if 7 of the biggest museums got sacked in a week, the computer files that would have helped track the objects down were destroyed, only originals were taken while copies were left behind. And if the only protected building was the ministry of oil, it’s because they didn’t have enough guys around to do the job and the US wanted to make sure poor civilians would profit from the natural resources of their country… All that makes a lot of sense. I can’t wait to see the Hollywood movie about it. Whatever makes you feel patriotic guys…
Posted by Mr. X 2003.04.21, 08:40
From that article that “puts some sense into this non-sense” -> “Iraq’s cash crop is the black gold they’re sitting on, not some rocks in a museum,” and right after: “I understand the damage historically.” A little contradictory isn’t it? Bush being stupid a stereotype? It’s more like an euphemism… Just look at his face, the only thing that could prevent you from noticing he’s a total retard would be that you’re too proud to admit that your own country has a dictator in the White House and/or too lazy to do anything about it… Why people become so naive when it comes down to their own Country? Yeah, sure… some random Iraqis did the job and it’s just a coincidence if 7 of the biggest museums got sacked in a week, the computer files that would have helped track the objects down were destroyed, only originals were taken while copies were left behind. And if the only protected building was the ministry of oil, it’s because they didn’t have enough guys around to do the job and the US wanted to make sure poor civilians would profit from the natural resources of their country… All that makes a lot of sense. I can’t wait to see the Hollywood movie about it. Whatever makes you feel patriotic guys…
Posted by Vincent M. Ferrari 2003.04.24, 01:11
Actually, what I wrote is not hypocritical at all, if you read it.
My point was that I understand the historical significance of the rocks in the museum, but frankly, they will not be as important to the rebuilding of Iraq as the oil they’re sitting on. It’s not hypocritical to say I understand the significance of one thing but think another is more important, especially in the context of rebuilding a country.
It has nothing to do with patriotism or hollywood, and a lot more to do with common sense, something your cheap attack is seriously lacking.
Posted by p0ps 2003.07.06, 00:51
I am also disturbed by the reported burning of the Koranic Library. I heard on NPR (did anyone else?) that one of the many historic Korans burned was a Koran hand written by the founder of the Shia sect - Ali Akbar, the Hashmite Prince, great grandson of The Prophet, Mohammed. During the chaos created by the invasion of Iraq and the response to it, Robert Fisk reported in this radio interview that well equipped and trained arsonists arrived in buses and executed the burnings of 158 Ministry Buildings not guarded by Coalition forces, among those, the Ministry of Religion which housing the Koranic Library. He speculates that Saddam was not likely to have commissioned the arsonists, but he does not speculate further about who may have sent them or whose interests were served by the burnings. So far, all reports I’ve seen or heard about the Koranic Library burning have been from him. I’d like to know of other reports from witnesses either confirming or denying his reports. If you have seen or heard reports from any other witnesses or if you are a witness, please post your reports or links to published witness accounts.
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
