Iraqi Mojo: Patriotism Tied at Both Ends

Iraqi Mojo is the pen-name of an Iraqi American, meaning “magic” or “unexplained source of power to heal and change.” To anyone familiar with his writings and its subject matter, which aims to expose whatever acts of injustice may be inflicted upon the innocent and with silent bias granted to none, perhaps it is his motivation to enlighten his readers wherever ignorance perpetuates the suffering which reflects his chosen name.

Iraqi Mojo, whose blog can be found at http://www.iraqimojo.blogspot.com, began writing at this URL address in October, 2006, during the height of Iraqi insurgency and dangerously close to civil war. It was also during this time when American presence was seen in a negative light throughout the world, for the hardships that came with post-war aftermath had been realized and threatening to overshadow the memories of conditions under Saddam.

“I started my blog after I realized that many Arabs, maybe even a majority, do not know what Saddam's regime did to Iraqis,” Iraqi Mojo said. “They are either just ignorant or they have a skewed view of happenings in Iraq before 2003. I wanted to document my own stories, such as things that happened to our friends and relatives.”

Iraqi Mojo was born in Baghdad but spent much of his early life in the United States where is father was earning a degree. It was 1980 when his family made preparations to return to Iraq, visiting relatives in London while en route; it was also when Iraqi Mojo had first learned of Saddam's true tyrannical nature: two of his older cousins were killed during a time when Hussein's regime began to exterminate Da'wa party members and anyone else engaging in residual Islamic revolutionary activities reminiscent of Ayatolla Khomeini's Shia uprising in Iran.

Iraqi Mojo's mother tried to convince his father to stay in the UK but he insisted on returning because of previous contract obligations. The decision was finalized, and his family made home in Iraq, and shortly after began the Eight-Years War.

Iraqi Mojo explains how many of his extended family members were conscripted in a war they never believed in, under duress of imprisonment or death. To accentuate his point, Iraqi Mojo describes how one cousin deserted his post on the front lines and his cousin's entire immediate family was consequently imprisoned, bar none, including young children and elderly members.
Iraqi Mojo possesses a blend of sentiment for his Arabian heritage and a strong belief in many of the American principles he grew up with: amnesty rights to all humans regardless of race or creed, freedom to practice religion without theocratic suppression of non-believers, and equal rights for women.

His relationship with both the United States and Iraq can get a little complicated under certain circumstances, since it was the United States who had secured Saddam's power through financial and military support throughout the Iraq-Iran war, and America had also failed to endorse Iraq's 1991 uprising. Yet, Iraqi Mojo had always supported the Bush Administration's decision to invade Iraq, leaving the WMD reasoning aside, because he felt that Saddam's brutal regime must be disposed of, and by any means necessary.

“The U.S. must stick with Iraq and ensure that a positive outcome is achieved,” Iraqi Mojo said. “[They must establish] something as close to democracy and justice as possible, given the circumstances. It is not an easy thing to do, but I'm glad the U.S. is finally helping the Iraqi Shia and Kurds instead of abandoning them to thugs and tyrants, like we've done before.”

Since Iraqi Mojo holds no preference to any one kind of Iraqi National, regardless of racial or religious distinction, his view of American intervention in Iraq is generally supportive so long as American policy aims to promote equality and justice to all its citizens, and his constructive criticisms towards American foreign policy is no different from any other American concerned with government incompetence.

“I hope the US and the Iraqis have learned from the lessons [of this war], including de-baathification--we have to be careful not to exclude Iraqis who may have been members of the Ba'ath party, but did not have blood on their hands.” Iraqi Mojo said.

Included among his disappointments with American foreign policy decisions, like the Paul Bremer period, would be America's willingness to overlook Israeli oppression of Palestinian citizens. Iraqi Mojo is far from being an anti-Semite, and he understands the distinctions between Israeli governmental policy and Jews; his concern for Palestinians is much less influenced by Arab-centrist philosophies and more to do with intolerance for anything resembling Jim Crow.

“The Arabs can learn a lot, to be honest,” Iraqi Mojo said. “They can learn to be more truthful with respect to Iraq, and not be such hypocrites. The Americans, on the other hand, must stop being hypocrites as well, with regard to Palestine/Israel. We should strive for justice in Iraq AND Palestine.”

Iraqi Mojo's reference of Arab hypocrites can be exemplified through certain viewer comments posted in response to many of his articles, like his May 4, 2009 posting entitled, “Iraqis are refusing to succumb to terror.” The article recounts an incident in a Shia house of worship called the Zahra Husseiniya, where a 16-year-old potential suicide bomber failed to detonate his bomb vest due to the successful tackling of security guards. Though the article did not officially state the boy's militant affiliation, one commenter named Jaguar B. P. described the overpowering scenario as, “a raafidhi magusi animal trampling some child,” indicating a bias against the “rejecter” Shia. In the same comment he mentions the brutality behind the “shock and awe” which killed Iraqi civilians, which was precisely who the “child” was intending to kill along with himself.

Iraqi Mojo bears the typical circumstances of a man with strong principles caught between two ideological worlds: his criticism of actions and biases committed by all parties concerned leaves him vulnerable to attacks from both sides, and tragically accused of betraying an affiliation simply because he refuses to tout the platforms of the demagogues.

There are dozens of comments left by viewers like “True Iraqi” who equates Iraqi Mojo's Arab heritage with American citizenship as an admixture for “traitor” or “uncle tom.”

“I was attacked as 'traitor' many times there and worse,” Iraqi Mojo said. “The most hideous attacks have come from Arab Americans. Many Arabs, Arab Americans, Arab Canadians, and Arab Europeans have come to my blog to insult me and accuse me of lying. Many of them came from [blog sites] like Angry Arab and Healing Iraq.”

The complexity of Iraqi Mojo's feelings towards the Iraq War, such that could be misconstrued as “contradictory” by the less perceptive, is certainly reflected in the various photos he has posted. The eclecticism of his photos could be defined under journalistic terms as both “iconic” and “realistic,” ranging from depictions of Iraqi civilians embracing American troops in celebration of Saddam's overthrow to grieving Iraq families and dead children. One may not be able to determine Iraqi Mojo's “agenda” through posted photos alone, but doesn't the reality of war encompass a wide range of opinions and circumstances, along with the emotions they carry?

Posted along the side-scrolls of his blog are two polls concerning Iraq stability and American presence to maintain it. Iraqi Mojo's readership is welcome to answer in whatever degree, “should Iraq split up,” or “when should the U.S. withdraw from Iraq?”

The results are interesting: the readership is almost evenly split between immediate American withdrawal and staying the course for as long as necessary, whereas two-thirds of those who polled preferred a unified Iraq in spite of the sectarian differences.

Admittedly, these polls cannot be trusted to provide accurate information since none is barred from repeating participation, and Iraqi Mojo's viewer demographic may not accurately reflect the opinion ratio of Iraqi citizens who bear the greatest stake in these questions. But judging from the hundreds of comments left by his viewership, the ideological diversity certainly ranges from “Go USA!!” to “Go to hell, USA!!”

The poll question concerning Iraqi solidarity did pique my interest, for I have always wondered if the American campaign “to liberate Iraq” was a legitimate cause with native support, an Orwellian disguise for post-Cold War imperialism, or simply just a naive Western fantasy.

My knowledge of Iraq's history was limited, thus procuring the assumption that since their national borders were created by British and French forces under the Sykes-Picot Agreement in 1916, there was no organic sense of Iraqi identity shared among its citizens outside of religious and racial distinctions.

To my surprise, after reading through various articles and respective comments from Iraqi nationals, Iraq has a long history of regional identity that surpassed religious and racial differences. In fact, natives had referred to themselves as “Iraqis” long before the League of Nations mandate in 1920.

“I think the degree of importance is this: geographical, religious, and then racial ties,” Iraqi Mojo said. “Most Iraqis don't want to split up Iraq, with the Kurds as an exception. most Iraqi Kurds want their own country, as they are ethnically different from Arabs, which make up about 20% of Iraq.”

The Kurdish dilemma is not solely an Iraqi issue, for millions of Kurds are also residing in other nations, especially in western regions of Turkey. The irony behind the Kurdish plight is that American justification for Iraq invasion had included Saddam's genocide programs, such as the Halabjah massacre, at the very same time America endorsed Turkey for induction into the European Union despite their atrocious record against Kurdish separatists.

During the course of the Iraq War, there were limitations placed upon embedded reporters, in regards to acquiring stories and counterpointing interviews from Iraqi citizens, and comments from Lt. Col. Rick Long during his speech at a Berkeley conference titled, War, Patriotism, and the Independence of the Press had certainly confirmed suspicions that the Pentagon is actively seeking methods to ensure favorable journalism.

However, coverage for the Iraq War has an advantage over previous American campaigns, which is the advent of the internet and its blogging tool wielded by citizens, military personnel, journalists, and anyone else greatly affected by the war.

It would seem that a tremendous flow of diverse information and perspectives might finally cut through the fog of war, perhaps even seal the ideological rifts, which typically catalyze bloodshed. But how many others would agree?

“Yes, it is possible for the warring sides to understand each other better via the web, but I don't think the web will help much in the grand scheme of things,” Iraqi Mojo said. “The web has been used as a recruiting tool by Al Qaeda and other extremists, and they've published some bigoted literature that only inflamed the sectarian tensions between Shia & Sunna. In many cases we ended up hating each other.”

Alas, the bittersweet result of a world connected by a modem and empowered with a keyboard: A billion doorways to knowledge, a billion reasons for bias, and a billion chances to misconstrue.