July 13, 2006

When it comes to Iraq, the media categorises everything, forgetting the nation that embraces all, writes Ghazwan Hadi*

The predominantly Sunni Al-Adhamiya district, the predominantly Shia Al-Sadr City, the predominantly Sunni Al-Anbar province, the predominantly-Shia Missan district... this is how Iraqi locales are depicted every day in the media. Whether discussing security or politics, economy or services, the labelling is there for all to see and hear. If anything, such rhetoric tells the Shias to leave cities in which they are not a majority, and the Sunnis to do the same. This message, hideous as it is, is latent in the language of the media. The media may seem objective, informative, even hi-tech, yet its message can be as crude as it is tendentious. Still it broadcasts this same message day in, day out. What next? What happens once demography catches up with prophecy? What happens once the districts of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities turn into ethnically pure zones? Once the factional lines are drawn, do we have much hope of avoiding a sectarian war?

Invisible hands are at work, inspiring the media, dictating its message. And the best writers are falling for it. Even the most neutral and independent media is buying into the charade. Even Iraqi media has been dragged into the habit of categorising, classifying and labelling. Consequently, the pace of forcible evictions is picking up in various parts of Baghdad and around the country. Meanwhile, journalists from various nationalities have become targets of terror, victims of pre-planned and pre-meditated attacks. On one day, four journalists were killed. Then for months no journalist was harmed. It's all taking shape according to plan.

The media speaks of each area in Iraq as being "predominantly" this or the other. Paradoxically, the same media often opposes the restructuring of Iraq along a federal axis, although similar moves towards federalism have succeeded everywhere in the Arab world, and in areas less ethnically diverse than Iraq. The media claims that federalism in Iraq would weaken it, drive it towards partition, and make it easy prey for its strong neighbours. Let's assume that this argument is valid. Let's assume that the worst imaginable thing is for Iraq to become a federal system with three autonomous provinces. If that's so, why are journalists bent on fuelling sectarian strife in each neighbourhood and city in the country? Doesn't this defeat the argument the media is making?

Worse still, Iraqi journalists now speak of Kirkuk Arabs, Kirkuk Kurds and Kirkuk Turkomans, as if Kirkuk has become a separate world onto its own. It is as if Kirkuk is no longer part of Iraq. So now you have Kirkuk Arabs who are not to be confused with the rest of the Arabs in the country. And you have Kirkuk Kurds who are similarly not to be confused with other Kurds. Such categorisation creates a mindset of discrimination and momentum towards sectarianism. Unfortunately, rhetoric is becoming real. Words are becoming self- fulfilling prophecy. The truth some people seem to have forgotten is that Iraq is a diverse country, but it is still a country nonetheless. Iraq has its own Arabs and Kurds, Turkomans and Yazidis, Sunnis and Shias -- and yet they are all Iraqis.

* The writer is a Baghdad-based Iraqi analyst.