If You Build It, They Won’t Come
When in doubt, build a wall. To keep people out, to keep them in, to keep them separated, to keep them at arms length.
The Israelis built a wall to safeguard themselves against the Palestinians, one that was condemned by the UN, though that shouldn’t particularly matter in their case. We are, after all, talking about a country that has an active nuclear program that the UN is not allowed access to even though the Israelis are adamant that the programs of others be scrutinized. Let’s also not forget that while building that wall they conveniently grabbed a few more acres of Palestinian land here and there, which is what some walls are also meant to do.
Some time ago, as some of you will recall, the Bush administration came up with a brilliant plan to stabilize Baghdad. They called it ‘a surge’, a plan entailing the deployment of more US troops to the embattled city, and one which has been largely unsuccessful in accomplishing its goal. In fact, a suicide bomber was actually able to get into the Greenzone not too long ago and kill members of the Iraqi Parliament. The Greenzone is, of course, the most heavily secured area in Baghdad, if not all Iraq.
The latest idea to help stem sectarian violence in the city is the construction of a 3.5 metre high concrete wall to “enclose Adhamiya district, where tit-for-tat sectarian violence is threatening to spiral out of control.�
Premier Nuri al-Maliki adamantly opposes the was, showing once again who is actually in control of the country – certainly not the Iraqi government.
“The planned walls are expected to reduce the traffic of armed militants between neighbourhoods. Each wall would have two access points only.
The Adhamiya wall’s construction had already begun on April 10.
According to Britain’s The Guardian, which blew the whistle on the construction last Saturday, US paratroopers from Camp Taji, some 30 kilometres to the north of Baghdad, transported “stacks of huge (6,300-kilogram) concrete barriers” in trucks into the capital.
“Cranes, protected by tanks, winched them into place. Building has continued every night since,” the newspaper report read.
And according to Atta, similar constructions are to follow and are expected to appear in areas like Rasafa and Karakh.
Sunnis are increasingly concentrating to the west of the Tigris in Baghdad, while Shiites flee to the east.�
One wonders, given the extreme paranoia prevalent in North America, that plans for one hundred story walls up and down the Eastern and Western seaboards aren’t being drafted. Of course, we would have to ensure that the wall stretched the entire distance of the Mexican border as well. That way we can be assured that no one will be able to access the continent without having to cross through highly guarded checkpoints where snarling dogs and camouflage clad soldiers with assault rifles can inspect those desiring admittance. We can build massive man-made islands just off the coast to house gigantic airports where flights from abroad would be forced to land, their passengers made to take ferries or high speed trains to entrance points where we could assure that we were admitting the right sort of people. In addition, we could, in a combined effort, house massive anti-aircraft missiles at points along the barrier to shoot down anything that strayed too close to it, be it a jumbo jet or a flock of Canadian geese.
It seems to me that if we’re to protect ourselves, the proper course of action would be to create such a ridiculous monstrosity to better exemplify our ever increasing disdain for those we have come to distrust. That way they’d get the message.
The only problem is that every car and truck on the continent would have to be powered by electricity, because without our militaries actively involved in the most oil rich region of the world, we’d find ourselves in a bit of a jam with regards to ensuring the survival of that most sacred of inventions – the drive-thu.
Updated
Juan Cole comments on the Baghdad wall.
Want to bookmark or share this entry?
This entry was posted on Monday, April 23rd, 2007 at 4:07 pm. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
April 23rd, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Keep in mind. If we build walls to keep things out, then we’re trapped inside. I’m not so sure I want to be trapped inside a wall. Actually I’m positive I would rather not be walled in with the likes of some people. Lets not forget. Walls can’t protect us from ourselves.
April 23rd, 2007 at 4:21 pm
I really don’t see how building a wall is going to keep all the violence from happening. Sure, it’ll probably slow down the insurgency, but in the long run, will it actually do what it’s being built to do? It just seems like were doing everything we can to drag this whole thing out just a bit longer…
April 23rd, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Oh my God…
Matt, those ideas are genius! Should you really be giving them away for free? Surely there’s profit to be made here…
April 23rd, 2007 at 4:38 pm
Camoflage makes me look fat. I could dig a snarling dog though.
The wall in Baghdad is only half as high as the invisible wall surrounding the White House.
April 23rd, 2007 at 5:38 pm
That last bit was satirical. That’s why the entry with “satire”.
April 23rd, 2007 at 5:46 pm
I think the biggest problem with building these walls is the symbolic mentality it generates. If you look at examples of other walls, like the ones in Northern Ireland, they come to embody the obsession with blowing up small differences to be bigger than they are. By throwing up the wall betweent the Shiites and Sunnis you validate their claims that the other side is indeed different and poses a considerable threat to them, instead of trying to defuse the violence already taking place.
The other problem with the wall is its dubious connection to the Israeli security barrier. Although Israelis have legitimate claims to secure their own country, the wall has done little more than inflame the sensibilities and opinions of the Palestinians anyhow. One shouldn’t expect any less than the same sense of anger from the Iraqis on the topic, especially since the close feeling of connections in the populations between the plight of the Iraqis and plight of the Palestinians.
April 23rd, 2007 at 5:52 pm
Do you think that’s what Bush meant when he said the Americans were going to rebuild Iraq?
Perhaps they misplaced the original blueprints …
April 23rd, 2007 at 6:25 pm
Personally, I live in a 14-tonne bomb shelter 40 meters below the ground and 150 meters above sea level.
I have, on hand, 1400 bags of crispers, 8,000 jugs of water, 2,000 pails of coffee, and some other tasteless canned goods to keep me going.
I’ve also got a large stack of nudies, and a wired plug for the coffee maker and my laptop which I hope will work for awhile.
It just doesn’t surprise me that they’re building walls up there. It’s the smart thing to do, really, but the smartest of course, is to build ‘em underground, and live in ‘em.
I’m ultra safe, but the air’s awful. Built a super long air tunnel up to the surface but forgot a filter, and what with my chain smoking, and the smell from the far too shallow latrine hole (a hindsight realization) sometimes I get smacking headaches.
Should packed a 1,000 bottles of advil, but forgot.
April 23rd, 2007 at 6:33 pm
Man, are you trying to give them ideas?
April 23rd, 2007 at 6:33 pm
I was having a conversation with some people at work today about current affairs and made a point about how absolutely pathetic it is that GW and his Cabinet are the ones who are designing the blueprint for a “new Iraq.” When I received some inquisitive looks regarding that statement, I put it into context that everyone could understand:
Imagine Bush Sr. and Jr., Clinton, Reagan, Ford, Carter, LBJ, and Nixon were the founding fathers of the United States and they had drawn up the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights! Imagine how VASTLY different this country would be…
It’s widely regarded - politics, motives, and indiscretions aside - that the founding fathers of the united states were quite ingenius and understanding of the principles of law. The same definitely cannot be said about the other group mentioned above. Picking any one of the modern presidents mentioned above, no less GW, arguably the least learned of the names mentioned, to draft the blueprint for a new country is just heinous.
GW’s plan to build walls around the embattled cities in Iraq to curb violence is a metaphor for how he has conducted his affairs while in the White House. Surround yourself with enough cement and you’ll be impervious to the people trying to bring you down. The concept is nothing short of laughable.
April 23rd, 2007 at 6:48 pm
If I may make a suggestion - perhaps the walls could be replaced with Slip ‘n Slides? Bad guys are stupid and clumsy, so they’d never get by. Everyone else could just have fun.
April 23rd, 2007 at 7:53 pm
Hey… It worked in Belfast, right?
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:04 pm
“I’ve also got a large stack of nudies,” I’ve got an idea Dale…
My bunker is a titanium cavern below the rockies. I actually only provided enough equipment and space for about 1 meal per day and very little water. The rest of the area has been devoted to skin mags. I want the Mutant People of the future to know how perfect our chicks used to be.
Here’s my proposal to you, Dale. When the nuclear winter ends let’s construct another paper money empire, but this time let’s use our mags for the currency. Kim Jong-il and Robert Bordon have nothing on Briana Banks when it comes to pictures I want on my money.
We’ll be the Kings of the Horny Mutant People. Then we can fight each other.
By the way, Matt, I think the numbers were crunched on your “lock em out” proposal already, looks like slow genocide is better business.
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:30 pm
The residents of the area seem to be clearly against the wall. Does the US know best? Perhaps the wall would reduce the death toll, but it would also isolate the community and cause a whole range of problems. It’s also a simple, temporary solution to a problem that is going to require some serious work. Unfortunetly, its unlikely anything long-term will happen, except the further disintergration of Iraq.
One of the most interesting books I read on the American occupation of Iraq was called “Imperial Life in the Emerald City: Inside Iraq’s Green Zone” by Rajiv Chandrasekaran. It changed my perspective on the invasion, and really explains exactly why and how the US got into this mess - and many ways they likely could have avoided it. That said, it also shows how the sectarian divide began in Iraq. It actually wasn’t as big a deal as it became after the invasion. There were many inter-marriages between Sunni and Shias, and a lot of mixed neighbourhoods. It became an issue partly through extremely poor cultural understandings of Iraq by US officials and terrible policies. I know there’s a lot of books on Iraq, but this is a really good one to understand how the occupational authority really screwed it up. Of course, its american-centric, but the author interestingly talks to British troops/staff, Iraqis, and various other groups.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:26 am
Separate Iraq with borders? Nah, lets just build a wall!
April 24th, 2007 at 7:54 am
you should write some fiction about these ideas. it might open some people’s eyes. kinda like how The Day After Tomorrow made more people look at global warming?