October 11, 2006

The Iraq Doublespeak Glossary

 

The Iraq War has become so complex that the administration has required a new language to explain the situation to a skeptical public thirsty for understanding. Some of us may even be unaware of unconscious changes in our understanding of words or phrases. This initial effort is intended to help us confront this linguistic challenge.

 

“insurgents”

People shooting at us or at people we like. In Iraq these are people who never accepted a government that resulted from a political process organized by an occupying army. This is not to be confused with the word’s usual use, according to Webster, “people who revolt against civil authority or an established government”. Recent events have brought new precision to this word’s meaning. It now generally refers to Sunnis killing Shiites, but not Shiites killing Sunnis, since the Shiites who are killing Sunnis are often part of some official government body. This inconvenient fact has caused some confusion in the use of this term. A simpler definition, also in wide use by the administration, is “any civilian we have killed or caused the death of in any way”.

 

“coalition”

The armies of the United States and Great Britain, and a limited number of soldiers from a small and diminishing number of smaller countries. These would be nations whose need for aid and/or other support from the United States is greater than the political cost of their casualties and the embarrassment of being involved in one of the greatest foreign policy debacles of all time. Not to be confused with a group of important and committed countries enthusiastically collaborating to fight a clear and common enemy, e.g. the Allies during WWII.

 

“Ace of Spades”

The administration’s very public pre-capture code name for Saddam Hussein. Some will remember a deck of playing cards the President used as one tool to simplify complex issues of the war, identifying each of the fugitives from the former Iraqi government with a different card. These cards haven’t been seen much lately – perhaps because the lack of planning for the war didn’t contemplate the need for so many decks of cards. Also, some of the individuals named on the cards may now have been elected to the government.

 

“unlawful enemy combatants”

People accused of being militant fundamentalist Muslims, or those associated with them, who we think might be trying to kill us without a formal declaration of war from any recognized government. Oops! Since declarations of war aren’t all they are made out to be, let’s just say “who we think are trying to kill us without being connected to any recognized government” – a situation that of course makes it harder to find a country to bomb in retaliation. Individuals unfortunate enough to be in this category, even U.S. citizens, are immediately treated and talked about as if they are guilty, as in, “Do you think terrorists deserve the protections of our constitutional system?”

 

“Green Zone”

The formerly safe area within central Baghdad.

 

“cut and run”

Any policy option that doesn’t include “staying the course” in Iraq, especially if proposed by Democratic politicians.

 

“redeployment”

Cutting and running proposed by Republicans, or administration supporters. This term may have an expanded and more flexible meaning once the Baker Commission comes out with its report.

  

“success”

A dynamic phrase, changing by the moment. Its meaning seems to have traveled the following course: model democracy in the Arab Middle East > Saddam Hussein overthrown > a functioning government that can stay in power a respectable amount of time after our departure > a functional Iraqi military > the U.S. military safely home without a new terrorist state, another Iranian-style Islamic Republic, or civil war and total anarchy in the aftermath. This is not to be confused in any way with “Mission Accomplished”.

 

“democracy”

A country willing to guarantee us oil at a reasonable price for the long term. Alternatively perhaps, a country whose politicians use American political consultants to gain or maintain power. Care must be taken not to muddy this term with any references to free elections, political stability, personal security, freedom of speech, wide involvement in the political process or economic justice.

 

“torture”

This term still describes the application of extreme and unacceptable physical punishment to individuals being held in confinement, as with enemy prisoners. The current refinement of this term is that its definition now also takes account of the persons doing the torturing. To qualify the behavior must be done by our enemies to us, rather than by us to them, clearly a much more precise usage of this important term.

 

I hope this helps.