"...you are not facing the Arab/Islamic view of the US."
What I am unsuccessfully trying to point out is, there is not a "view" of the US that singularly represents an "Arab/Islamic view". The politicized media tries to define one and IMO it is a corruption of what exists.
The US media is somewhat center of the universe egocentric. I don't know of any nationality that has a general view of some other nationality, except as it benefits their strategic position in the world.
The Arab/Islamic regions have their own interests to consider. It is realistic for them to be cautiously vigilant as Iraq is restructured, and in some cases threatened by it. It is not necessarily in everyone's best interests to see Iraq rebuilt. When the Shi'ites become dominant, they may represent a threat to Saudi, Jordan, Asyria, Egypt, etc.
Iraq is attempting to establish power, stability, and security in their region and they recognize the USA for what it is. The USA has been useful to those who want to maintain security while they build a new democratically autonomous system; it has been a thorn in the side of those who want to revolutionize or overthrow the region for other purposes. The USA is not useful for increasing Iraqi status over their counter parts in the world. The USA is not useful in determining what is generally in their self interests. The USA is mostly concerned about its own interests, of course.
Some Arab/Islamic views (both inside and outside of Iraq) are that the new Iraq is a good thing, some view it as a bad thing. Whether it is a good or bad thing, none of them want to view Iraq as under the control of the USA in the long run. Some Arab/Islamic regions of the world are going to be friendly to Iraq and some are not, no matter what the government of Iraq becomes...that is of course a reflection on our involvement as well.
So, it is unrealistic in the first place to attempt a measure of the success of US operations by this mysterious Arab/Islamic view of the US... which is multifacited in the first place. |
