More on the Ransacking of Baghdad
Comments: 12
Salon.com has two additional lead stories on the ransacking of Baghdad. Neither of them brings much new to our understanding of the tragedy, but that’s not the point. I think they’ve been posted to help keep the story in the news and make sure it gets the full coverage and accounting it deserves. There are people who would love for this story to just disappear, but that simply cannot happen.
The first story follows a line that must have occured to us all: that this tragedy is a direct consequence of Rumsfeld’s “war on the cheap” strategy, of “rolling starts” with insufficient manpower.
The end of civilization
By Louise WittOn Jan. 24 at the Pentagon, a small group of accomplished archeologists and art curators met with Joseph Collins, who reports directly to Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and four other Pentagon officials to talk about how the U.S. military could protect Iraq’s cultural and archeological sites from damage and destruction during the impending war in that country. McGuire Gibson, a professor at the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago, gave the officials a list of 5,000 cultural and archeological sites. First on the list: the National Museum of Iraq in Baghdad.
Gibson recalls he talked to the group about the importance of safeguarding the museum from bomb damage – and from looting after the military conflict ended. “I pointed to the museum’s location on a map of Baghdad and said: ‘It’s right here,’” he recalled in an interview. “I asked them to make assurances that they’d make efforts to prevent looting and they said they would. I thought we had assurances, but they didn’t pan out.”
The second story, by Karen Croft, is a very quick interview with Linda Komaroff, curator of Islamic art at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, that provides an overview of the type and importance of the National Museum’s collection (she doesn’t discuss the national Library).
What if someone stole the Constitution and the Liberty Bell?
By Karen CroftTo play devil’s advocate, why should someone in Peoria care about a cuneiform tablet or a silver harp in a museum in Baghdad?
There are two different ways they might care. I’ll do the less important first: The reason excavation in that part of the world became popular was because of archaeologists who wanted to prove the historical validity of the Bible. Now, someone in Peoria is going to have heard of Ur, because Abraham came from there. But more of interest to Darwinists and to people not interested in proving the validity of the Bible is that we share a common civilization, and that’s where it began. A cuneiform tablet touched by someone 4,000 years ago is gone. We are all affected by that. It diminishes all of us. It’s not as though we can say, “I didn’t come from there.” Civilization traces its roots there.
•••
Posted to Oh, the Humanity • 2003.04.17 (Thu) • 22:01
Comments
Posted by Buzz Andersen 2003.04.17, 23:37
John Lee Anderson, whose reporting I have greatly admired throughout the war, has a great piece in The New Yorker about this as well. It doesn’t really discuss the museums, but it does talk about looting in a lot of other really disturbing places (like hospitals).
Posted by Anthony 2003.04.18, 05:44
Does it matter if this was some type of inside job and not random looting? Though disconcerting, I do think that most of these items will be returned/found in time.
The Knight Ridder news service reported yesterday that museum officials think most of the looters were looking for items that would be useful in daily life, such as office machines and furniture, and that only selected antiquities were taken.
Replicas of artifacts, which would look authentic to members of an angry mob, appear to be untouched. The national museum’s Egypt collection, valuable but not particularly unique, also was left alone.
Posted by Gary Santoro 2003.04.18, 08:00
Returned? How long will that take? How much reward money and police work? Many treasures will never be recovered. Let’s face the fact that 6-12 armed soldiers probably could have saved Iraq a billion dollars, not to mention the historical and scientific value.
Posted by Cailean Babcock 2003.04.18, 10:52
As a lover of history, I agree that it’s a tragedy that the museums and libraries were looted and burned. However, it really comes down to war being an ugly thing and that loss and destruction is part of it (for example, all of the lives that were lost on both sides; harps can be remade, individuals can’t.)
Looting happens in times like these. The soldiers on the front are trying their best not to get shot and finish this. When you’re staring down the barrel of a sniper’s rifle, I’m sure there’s really not much opportunity to order somebody to go off and mind the museum. You’re more worried about staying alive, and seeing to it that as much loss of life is prevented as possible.
It’s easy to criticize the actions of other in a situation that one has never been in and can’t begin to imagine (for example, the front line of a war.) I sympathize with the sentiment that humanity could stand to be a little more noble, but we’ve got to work with what we’ve got.
In the end, life is more important. More history will be made.
Posted by Gary Santoro 2003.04.18, 16:52
I’m sorry Cailean - I can’t accept your statement and reasoning.
The US was advised repeatedly on this matter prior to the war. We put soldiers at the Iraqi Oil Ministry. Currently we are protecting banks. I certainly wouldn’t choose a soldiers life over any object, but it’s a part of Geneva/International law to protect these major institutions. If we invade, then we are not supposed to protect only the things “we feel like protecting” because someone might shoot at us.
If we engage in war, we accept all the responsibilities that go with it. You mention not having been in the frontlines of war. Many people have, and laws and codes have developed as a result.
I think it’s rather simple. This wouldn’t have occured if a real man was in charge. We failed to uphold the law.
Posted by Anonymous 2003.04.19, 04:41
Jeremy:
I’ve been reading with interest your comments regarding the looting of Iraq, and coincidentally this book: Shadow Warriors: Inside the Special Forces, a history of the American Special Forces by Tom Clancy and retired General Carl Stiner.
I came across the following passage on pages 364-5 today, and it seems the U.S. has had experiences very similar to what occurred when we overtook Iraq. It seems we didn’t learn enough from our previous Regime Change operation in Panama. I find that to be a shame, post-Saddam Iraq should not have been a surprise. PDF means Panamanian Defense Force, similar to the Republican Guard, and the Dignity Battallions I take to be similar to the Special Republican Guard. Take it away Mr. Stiner:
Stability Operations U.S. forces broke the PDF — and Noriega’s ability to control his forces — during the first hour of combat. By the end of D day, most of the fighting was over — though Panama was by no means safe. Many of the PDF had changed into Levi’s and slipped into the city, where they banded together to continue making trouble. There was no law and order. Have-nots, armed bands of hoodlums, Dignity Battalions, and PDF displaced by the fighting — and sometimes a mix of all the above — started looting and causing mayhem. This had been anticipated by American planners; the Task Force Atlantic and Task Force Pacific division commanders had orders to move into the city and begin stability operations to secure key facilities and mop up resistance. By dawn of the twentieth, there were already 3,000 refugees in the Balboa High School athletic field, including many PDF who had infiltrated in civilian clothes.There were also 1,500 detainees in a camp being established n a rifle range halfway up the Canal — a number that grew to 4,600 within a week, as more detainees were brought in from the combat units. Meanwhile, hospitals had to be reopened and sanitation services restarted. A CBS News poll later determined that 93 percent of the Panamanian people supported U.S. operations — yet the same people had instant expectations that their new government could not soon fulfill, since the removal of Noriega’s appointees had decapitated most of the vital institutions. Though additional units from the 7th Special Forces group and civil affairs were being brought in to handle these needs, the demand was now, and it could only be satisfied in the near term by the military personnel already on the ground. The immediate tasks were:Meanwhile, all major military objectives had been achieved: The PDF had been neutralized, the PDF command and control no longer functioned, Noriega was no longer in control, and the new government had been installed. On the downside, Noriega had not been captured, and U.S. forces had no idea where to find him.
- Mopping up and bringing security to the major cities, particularly Panama City and Colon.
- Neutralizing the PDF and Dignity Battalions in the remainder of Panama
- Reestablishing law and order.
- Taking care of refugees and displaced persons.
Posted by Corey 2003.04.19, 08:33
The above comment wasn’t meant to be anonymous. It’s from me.
Posted by Persaud 2003.04.20, 14:26
Forget the Oil Ministry even. Marines were relentlessly guarding Land Cruisers, while the Museum was being plundered. Without specific instructions, I guess they felt the Land Cruisers were the more important. Inspector Clouseau must have been in command.
“John Daniszewski, LA Times BAGHDAD, 12 April 2003 in Arab News— Outside the Canal Hotel, former headquarters of the United Nations here, scores of men waited like vultures Thursday [April 10] and eyed the fleet of white four-wheel-drive Land Cruisers. Maybe it was the lure of the unobtainable — the Land Cruisers were one of the few prizes left in this city not already grabbed. They were being protected by 2nd Battalion, 23rd Marines. And the Marines weren’t letting the cars go..”
Posted by Taylor 2003.04.20, 15:01
I was so inspired by your great buttons (and platypus’s variations among others) that I made a few more AND also assembled all that i could find on one page. Check it out on my site :)
Posted by Anonymous 2003.04.21, 09:24
yawn BFD. You people are grasping at any excuse to get all up in arms about the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Why put it on the U.S.? Does Iraq bear no responsibility for having not, oh, say, taken the oh-so-valuable loot underground? Lawd knows they had plenty of time (read: centuries) to do so.
Posted by Gary Santoro 2003.04.21, 12:48
(Snore) Dear Anonymous,
Why put it on the US? I don’t know, perhaps you can ask the Hague.
“We” people? We people actually read the articles. The loot WAS underground.
Posted by Randal Wood 2003.04.21, 23:00
The problem might be that Americans, at least certain Americans—like the sort who got gentlemen’s C’s at Yale—can’t conceive of something so much more important than the Libety Bell as the Laws of Hammurapi. Did you know that there is a statue of Hamarabi—and of Moses and Solon—on the pediment of the State Capitol of Nebraska at Lincoln? It’s not actually on the pediment, for the building is a skyscraper, and skyscrapers don’t have pediments. And now Iraq doesn’t have Hammurapi’s tablet, and that’s a darn shame.
Post a comment:
Send This Story to an Enemy
• • •
