The dictionary defines 'ignominy' as 'disgrace' and it is the word recently used by Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland to describe Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s decision to withdraw a 51 person contingent from Iraq in exchange for the life of a kidnapped Philippine national.

Far from being an 'ignominy' this was a courageous and morally correct action on the part of the Philippine president who put the saving of a human life before the empty bravado and politically motivated hypocrisy of other members of the coalition put together by the Bush administration in its phony 'War Against Terrorism.'

If there is any 'ignominy' it is the writings of columnists who use their access to the mass media to paint the craven self-serving policies of such coalition partners as Italy, Japan and others who standby and refuse to back away from their unwarranted support of the aggressive US policies in the Middle East while their nationals a re murdered or threatened. Hoagland, in fact, credits 'refusing to bargain' to save human life with being a policy of 'political solidarity and maturity.'

By now everyone knows that Iraq has nothing to do with the attack on 9/11. That the war against Iraq was planned long before that attack and that it is part of a plan for US domination of the Middle East and its oil, and the coalition of the coerced that the US put together is made up of nations with ulterior motives having nothing to do with the fight against terrorism.

While Germany and France opposed the war from a principled position based on a commitment to the UN and a refusal to support what all knowledgeable observers consider an unnecessary war of choice, the coalition 'partners' – mostly countries with right wing or even fascistoid regimes – have no more credibility as defenders of humanity against terrorists than does the pro-torture and civilian-killing Bush administration. Hoagland admits the Philippine force was 'symbolic' and 'militarily insignificant.' In fact it was simply another fig leaf to cover up the naked aggression launched against the Iraqi people. The actions of the Philippine President are condemned because she preferred to save a life rather than continue to be part of the killing machine unleashed against the civilian population of Iraq where over 25,000 people, including thousands of children, have become 'collateral damage' – i.e., innocent victims of American aggression.

What motivates the countries Hoagland considers our true blue allies? He mentions Bulgaria and Poland – both of which are simply currying favor with the US hoping for financial aid and political pay offs in the future. Then there is Japan. Japan would not even admit its own terrorist behavior towards China in World War II. Its right-wing government wants to reconstitute the country’s armed forces and is using Iraq as an opportun ity to start this process. As for Italy – I hope Mr. Hoagland doesn’t seriously think a government that cooperates with ultra-right neo-fascists in its own country is committed to a fight against 'terrorists.'

The reason these so-called allies are refusing to negotiate to save their nationals is simply because they have no concern whatsoever for human life or dignity – any more than does the army which runs Abu Ghraib.

I am afraid the only 'ignominy' to be seen in the withdrawal of the Philippine forces was that of being in Iraq in the first place. Let us also be reminded that the people of Italy, Japan and other coalition forces, including Great Britain, are overwhelmingly opposed to 'their' respective government’s support of US policies – which means the support they give to the Bush administration is fundamentally undemocratic and thus immoral. The only government with the decency to respect the will of its own people, besides the Philippines, was Spain.



--Thomas Riggins is book review editor of Political Affairs and can be reached at pabooks@politicalaffairs.net.



» Find more of the online edition.