Where’s
Picasso?
Falluja:
The 21st Century Guernica
By
Saul Landau
On
November 12, as U.S. jets bombed Falluja for the ninth straight day, a Redwood
City California jury found Scott Peterson guilty of murdering his wife and
unborn child. That macabre theme captured the headlines and dominated
conversation throughout workplaces and homes.
Indeed,
Peterson “news” all but drowned out the U.S. military’s claim that
successful bombing and shelling of a city of 300,000 residents had struck
only sites where “insurgents” had holed up. On November 15, the BBC embedded
newsman with a marine detachment claimed that the unofficial death toll estimate
had risen to well over 2,000, many of them civilians.
As
Iraqi eyewitnesses told BBC reporters he had seen bombs hitting residential
targets, Americans exchanged viewpoints and kinky jokes about Peterson. One
photographer captured a Falluja man holding his dead son, one of two kids he
lost to U.S. bombers. He could not get medical help to stop the bleeding.
A
November 14 Reuters reporter wrote that residents told him that “U.S.
bombardments hit a clinic inside the Sunni Muslim city, killing doctors, nurses
and patients.” The U.S. military denied the reports. Such stories did not make
headlines. Civilian casualties in aggressive U.S. wars don’t sell media
space.
But
editors love shots of anguished GI Joes. The November 12 Los Angeles Times ran a
front page shot of a soldier with mud smeared face and cigarette dangling from
his lips. This image captured the “suffering” of Falluja. The GI complained
he was out of “smokes.”
The
young man doing his “duty to free Falluja,” stands in stark contrast to the
nightmare of Falluja. “Smoke is everywhere,” an Iraqi told the BBC (Nov 11).
“The house some doors from mine was hit during the bombardment on Wednesday
night. A 13-year-old boy was killed. His name was Ghazi. A row of palm trees
used to run along the street outside my house – now only the trunks are left…
There are more and more dead bodies on the streets and the stench is unbearable.”
Another
eyewitness told Reuters (November 12) that “a 9-year-old boy was hit in the
stomach by a piece of shrapnel. His parents said they couldn't get him to
hospital because of the fighting, so they wrapped sheets around his stomach to
try to stem the bleeding. He died hours later of blood loss and was buried in
the garden.”
U.S.
media’s embedded reporters – presstitutes? – accepted uncritically the
Pentagon’s spin that many thousands of Iraqi “insurgents,” including the
demonized outsiders led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who had joined the
anti-U.S. jihad, had dug in to defend their vital base. After the armored and
air assault began and the ground troops advanced, reports filtered out that the
marines and the new Iraqi army that trailed behind them had faced only light
resistance. Uprisings broke out in Mosul and other cities. For the combatants,
however, Falluja was Hell.
Hell
for what? Retired Marine Corps general Bernard Trainor declared that: militarily
“Falluja is not going to be much of a plus at all.” He admitted that
“we've knocked the hell out of this city, and the only insurgents we really
got were the nut-cases and zealots, the smart ones left behind the guys who
really want to die for Allah.” While Pentagon spin doctors boasted of a U.S.
“victory, Trainor pointed out that the “terrorists remain at large.”
The
media accepts axiomatically that U.S. troops wear the “white hats” in this
conflict. They do not address the obvious: Washington illegally invaded and
occupied Iraq and “re-conquered” Falluja – for no serious military purpose.
Logically, the media should call Iraqi “militants” patriots who resisted
illegal occupation.
Instead,
the press implied that the “insurgents” even fought dirty, using improvised
explosive devices and booby traps to kill our innocent soldiers, who use clean
weapons like F16s, helicopter gun ships, tanks and artillery.
Why,
Washington even promised to rebuild the city that its military just destroyed.
Bush committed the taxpayers to debts worth hundreds of millions of dollars,
which Bechtel, Halliburton and the other corporate beneficiaries of war will use
for “rebuilding.”
Banality
and corruption arise from the epic evil of this war, one that has involved
massive civilian death and the destruction of ancient cities.
In
1935, Nazi General Erich Luderndorff argued in his “The Total War" that
modern war encompasses all of society; thus, the military should spare no one.
The Fascist Italian General Giulio Douhet echoed this theme. By targeting
civilians, he said, an army could advance more rapidly. “Air-delivered terror”
effectively removes civilian obstacles.
That
doctrine became practice in late April 1937. Nazi pilots dropped their deadly
bombs on Guernica, the ancient Basque capital – like what U.S. pilots recently
did to Falluja. A year earlier, in 1936, the Spanish Civil War erupted. General
Francisco Franco, supported by fascist governments in Italy and Germany, led an
armed uprising against the Republic. The residents of Guernica resisted. Franco
asked his Nazi partners to punish these stubborn people who had withstood his
army’s assault.
The
people of Guernica had no anti-aircraft guns, much less fighter planes to defend
their city. The Nazi pilots knew that at 4:30 in the afternoon of market day,
the city’s center would be jammed with shoppers from all around the areas.
Before
flying on their “heroic mission,” the German pilots had drunk a toast with
their Spanish counterparts in a language that both could understand: “Viva la
muerte,” they shouted as their raised their copas de vino. The bombing
of Guernica introduced a concept in which the military would make no distinction
between civilians and combatants. Death to all!
Almost
1,700 people died that day and some 900 lay wounded. Franco denied that the raid
ever took place and blamed the destruction of Guernica on those who defended it,
much as the U.S. military intimates that the “insurgents” forced the savage
attack by daring to defend their city and then hide inside their mosques. Did
the public in 1937 face the equivalent of the Peterson case that commanded their
attention?
Where
is the new Picasso who will offer a dramatic painting to help the 21st
Century public understand that what the U.S. Air Force just did to the people of
Falluja resembles what the Nazis did to Guernica?
In
Germany and Italy in 1937, the media focused on the vicissitudes suffered by
those pilots who were sacrificing for the ideals of their country by combating a
“threat.” The U.S. media prattles about the difficulties encountered by the
marines. It never calls them bullies who occupy another people’s country,
subduing patriots with superior technology to kill civilians and destroy their
homes and mosques.
On
November 15, an embedded NBC cameraman filmed a U.S. soldier murdering a wounded
Iraqi prisoner in cold blood. As CNN showed the tape, its reporter offered
“extenuating circumstances” for the assassination we had witnessed. The
wounded man might have booby-trapped himself as other “insurgents” had done.
After all, these marines had gone through hell in the last week.
The
reporting smacks of older imperial wars, Andrew Greely reminded us in the
November 12, Chicago Sun Times. “The United States has fought unjust wars
before – Mexican American, the Indian Wars, Spanish American, the Filipino
Insurrection, Vietnam. Our hands are not clean. They are covered with blood, and
there'll be more blood this time.”
Falluja
should serve as the symbol of this war of atrocity against the Iraqi people, our
Guernica. But, as comedian Chris Rock insightfully points out, George W. Bush
has distracted us. That’s why he killed Laci Peterson, why he snuck that young
boy into Michael Jackson’s bedroom and the young woman into Kobe Bryant’s
hotel room. He wants us not to think of the war in Iraq. We need a new Picasso
mural, “Falluja,” to help citizens focus on the themes of our time, not the
travails of the Peterson case.
The
Bush Administration sensed the danger of such a painting. Shortly before
Colin Powell’s February 5, 2003, UN Security Council fraudulent, power point
presentation, where he made the case for invading Iraq, UN officials, at U.S.
request, placed a curtain over a tapestry of Picasso’s Guernica, located at
the entrance to the Security Council chambers. As a TV backdrop, the anti-war
mural would contradict the Secretary of State’s case for war in Iraq. Did the
dead painter somehow know that his mural would foreshadow another Guernica,
called Falluja?
Landau
directs digital media at Cal Poly Pomona University’s College of Letters, Arts
and Social Sciences. He is also a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies.
His latest book is THE BUSINESS OF AMERICA: HOW CONSUMERS HAVE RPELACED
CITIZENS AND HOW WE CAN REVERSE THE TREND.