Harper's Finest — March 21, 2013, 6:06 pm

Harper’s Magazine on the Iraq War (2002–2013)

Tracing our coverage of the war, from Lewis H. Lapham to Andrew J. Bacevich

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attack on the "Lost Platoon" of the Puerto Rican National Guard, Ramadi, February 2004. Illustration by Steve Mumford, Harper's Magazine, March 2005.

Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attack on the “Lost Platoon” of the Puerto Rican National Guard, Ramadi, February 2004. Painting by Steve Mumford, Harper’s Magazine, March 2005

This week marks the tenth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. As longtime readers of Harper’s Magazine know, we were a leading voice against the war even before it had begun. In our October 2002 issue, while the Bush Administration was working to justify the invasion to the American public, our editor, Lewis H. Lapham, penned “The Road to Babylon: Searching for targets in Iraq,” in which he laid out a perspective that informed our coverage in the years that followed. The article, which is available in its entirety here, provides an excellent big-picture view of the debate in the months leading up to war: 

Competing television net­works scheduled different time slots for the Pentagon’s forthcoming fireworks display — before and after November’s congressional election, in early January when the weather around Baghdad improved, next April because the Air Force needed six months to replenish its inventory of precision bombs. Com­peting newspaper columnists advanced competing adjectives to characterize the “extreme danger” presented to “the entire civilized world,” but none of them offered evidence proving that Saddam possessed weapons likely to harm anybody who didn’t happen to be living in Iraq; important military au­thorities appeared on the Sunday-morning talk shows to endorse policies of “forward deterrence” and “anticipatory self-defense,” but none of them could think of a good reason why Saddam would make the mistake of attacking the United States; the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 31 and Au­gust 1 conducted hearings on the question of Iraq and learned that its expert witnesses couldn’t say for certain whether they knew what they were talking about. The few shards of undisputed fact collected over two days of testimo­ny suggested that Saddam doesn’t sponsor Al Qaeda (or any of the other terrorist brigades that have asked him for money and explosives over the last eleven years), that the Iraqi army, never formidable, is less dangerous now than when it was routed in the four days of the Gulf War, the Iraqi Air Force of no consequence, the civilian economy too impoverished to support the reconstruction of the nuclear-weapons program dismantled by UNSCOM between 1991 and 1998, and Saddam himself best under­stood as a small-time thug apt to deploy chemical or biological weapons (if he possesses chemical or bio­logical weapons) only as a last and cowardly defense of his own person.

In the same issue, Harper’s published an assessment by David Armstrong of the intellectual underpinnings of the war. Armstrong revealed the coming conflict to be the fulfillment of a gradual evolution in American defense policy that Vice President Dick Cheney, in particular, had nurtured. In the ensuing years, Harper’s ran many more critiques of the Bush Administration’s arguments for, and prosecution of, the war. We also reported extensively on the lives of those it affected.

A list of some of those articles follows, concluding with our most recent take on Bush’s folly: Andrew J. Bacevich’s “A Letter to Paul Wolfowitz,” in which Bacevich challenges the former deputy secretary of defense to confront both the legacy of the war and his role in bringing it about. “Help us learn the lessons of Iraq,” Bacevich concludes, “so that we might extract from it something of value in return for all the sacrifices made there. Forgive me for saying so, but you owe it to your country.”


A selected list of Harper’s Magazine features on the Iraq war ($ = subscribe to read):

“The Road to Babylon: Searching for targets in Iraq,” by Lewis H. Lapham (October 2002)

“Dick Cheney’s Song of America: Drafting a plan for global dominance,” by David Armstrong (October 2002)

“Chronicle of a War Foretold: On the move with Ahmed Chalabi, the man who would be king,” by Charles Glass (July 2003, $)

“Beyond Baghdad: Lost in the cradle of civilization,” by Paul William Roberts (July 2003, $)

“Beyond Fallujah: A year with the Iraqi resistance,” by Patrick Graham (June 2004, $)

“The Bereaved: Mourning the dead, in America and Iraq,” a photo essay by Peter Turnley (August 2004, $)

“Baghdad Year Zero: Pillaging Iraq in pursuit of a neocon utopia,” by Naomi Klein (September 2004, $)

“Out of Iraq: The rise and fall of one man’s occupation,” by Adam Davidson (February 2005, $)

“Watching the Tempest: Drawings from Iraq,” by Steve Mumford (March 2005, $)

“Every Land Is Karbala: In Shiite posters, a fever dream for Iraq,” an Annotation by Steven Vincent (May 2005, $)

“Improvised, Explosive, & Divisive: Searching in vain for a strategy in Iraq,” by Tom Bissell (January 2006, $)

“Under the God Gun: Battling a fake insurgency in the Army’s fake Iraq,” by Wells Tower (January 2006, $)

“Judgment Days: Lessons from the Abu Ghraib courts-marial,” by JoAnn Wypijewski (February 2006, $)

“The Minister of Civil War: Bayan Jabr, Paul Bremer, and the rise of the Iraqi death squads,” by Ken Silverstein (August 2006, $)

“Misinformation Intern: My summer as a military propagandist in Iraq,” by Willem Marx (September 2006, $)

“Down! Up! You’re in the Iraqi Army Now,” an illustrated feature by Joe Sacco (April 2007, $)

“The Black Box: Inside Iraq’s oil machine,” by Luke Mitchell (December 2007)

“Exodus: Where will Iraq go next?” by Deborah Campbell (April 2008, $)

“A Letter to Paul Wolfowitz: Occasioned by the tenth anniversary of the Iraq war,” by Andrew J. Bacevich (April 2013)


Also of note: Bacevich published an op-ed in the Washington Post on the tenth anniversary of the war, assessing whether the United States could be said to have won. Publisher John R. MacArthur wrote in October 2002 about the connections between George Bush Sr.’s approach to building the case for war in Iraq and his son’s attempts to do the same. And in December 2011, on the occasion of the withdrawal of the final remaining U.S. troops, James Sligh compiled nine years’ worth of Weekly Review events into an Iraq War Review.

Share
Single Page

More from Harper’s Magazine:

Podcast February 12, 2020, 11:12 am

Selective Hearing

Towards a critical understanding of podcasts

Weekly Review February 11, 2020, 4:37 pm

Weekly Review

Donald Trump was impeached but not removed from office; the novel coronavirus death toll in China rose above nine hundred; a hunting convention auctioned off a trip to shoot Sitka black-tailed deer in Alaska with “accomplished conservationist” Donald Trump Jr.

Weekly Review February 5, 2020, 11:31 am

Weekly Review

Alan Dershowitz testified on behalf of Donald Trump; the United Kingdom left the European Union; the Iowa Democratic caucuses remained undecided in part because of an app programming error

Get access to 169 years of
Harper’s for only $23.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

February 2020

Trumpism After Trump

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“My Gang Is Jesus”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Cancer Chair

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Birds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Skinning Tree

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Interpretation of Dreams

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dearest Lizzie

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Trumpism After Trump·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The city was not beautiful; no one made that claim for it. At the height of summer, people in suits, shellacked by the sun, moved like harassed insects to avoid the concentrated light. There was a civil war–like fracture in America—the president had said so—but little of it showed in the capital. Everyone was polite and smooth in their exchanges. The corridor between Dupont Circle and Georgetown was like the dream of Yugoslav planners: long blocks of uniform earth-toned buildings that made the classical edifices of the Hill seem the residue of ancestors straining for pedigree. Bunting, starched and perfectly ruffled in red-white-and-blue fans, hung everywhere—from air conditioners, from gutters, from statues of dead revolutionaries. Coming from Berlin, where the manual laborers are white, I felt as though I was entering the heart of a caste civilization. Untouchables in hard hats drilled into sidewalks, carried pylons, and ate lunch from metal boxes, while waiters in restaurants complimented old respectable bobbing heads on how well they were progressing with their rib eyes and iceberg wedges.

I had come to Washington to witness either the birth of an ideology or what may turn out to be the passing of a kidney stone through the Republican Party. There was a new movement afoot: National Conservatives, they called themselves, and they were gathering here, at the Ritz-Carlton, at 22nd Street and M. Disparate tribes had posted up for the potlatch: reformacons, blood-and-soilers, curious liberal nationalists, “Austrians,” repentant neocons, evangelical Christians, corporate raiders, cattle ranchers, Silicon Valley dissidents, Buckleyites, Straussians, Orthodox Jews, Catholics, Mormons, Tories, dark-web spiders, tradcons, Lone Conservatives, Fed-Socs, Young Republicans, Reaganites in amber. Most straddled more than one category.

Article
The Cancer Chair·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The second-worst thing about cancer chairs is that they are attached to televisions. Someone somewhere is always at war with silence. It’s impossible to read, so I answer email, or watch some cop drama on my computer, or, if it seems unavoidable, explore the lives of my nurses. A trip to Cozumel with old girlfriends, a costume party with political overtones, an advanced degree on the internet: they’re all the same, these lives, which is to say that the nurses tell me nothing, perhaps because amid the din and pain it’s impossible to say anything of substance, or perhaps because they know that nothing is precisely what we both expect. It’s the very currency of the place. Perhaps they are being excruciatingly candid.

There is a cancer camaraderie I’ve never felt. That I find inimical, in fact. Along with the official optimism that percolates out of pamphlets, the milestone celebrations that seem aimed at children, the lemonade people squeeze out of their tumors. My stoniness has not always served me well. Among the cancer staff, there is special affection for the jocular sufferer, the one who makes light of lousy bowel movements and extols the spiritual tonic of neuropathy. And why not? Spend your waking life in hell, and you too might cherish the soul who’d learned to praise the flames. I can’t do it. I’m not chipper by nature, and just hearing the word cancer makes me feel like I’m wearing a welder’s mask.

Article
“My Gang Is Jesus”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

When Demétrio Martins was ready to preach, he pushed a joystick that angled the seat of his wheelchair forward, slowly lifting him to a standing position. Restraints held his body upright. His atrophied right arm lay on an armrest, and with his left hand, he put a microphone to his lips. “Proverbs, chapter fourteen, verse twelve,” he said. “ ‘There is a way which seems right to a man, but its end is . . .’ ”

The congregation finished: “ ‘Death.’ ”

The Assembly of God True Grapevine was little more than a fluorescent-lit room wedged between a bar and an empty lot in Jacaré, a poor neighborhood on Rio de Janeiro’s north side. A few dozen people sat in the rows of plastic lawn chairs that served as pews, while shuddering wall fans circulated hot air. The congregation was largely female; of the few men in attendance, most wore collared shirts and old leather shoes. Now and then, Martins veered from Portuguese into celestial tongues. People rose from their seats, thrust their hands into the air, and shouted, “Hallelujah!”

Article
The Birds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

On December 7, 2016, a drone departed from an Amazon warehouse in the United Kingdom, ascended to an altitude of four hundred feet, and flew to a nearby farm. There it glided down to the front lawn and released from its clutches a small box containing an Amazon streaming device and a bag of popcorn. This was the first successful flight of Prime Air, Amazon’s drone delivery program. If instituted as a regular service, it would slash the costs of “last-mile delivery,” the shortest and most expensive leg of a package’s journey from warehouse to doorstep. Drones don’t get into fender benders, don’t hit rush-hour traffic, and don’t need humans to accompany them, all of which, Amazon says, could enable it to offer thirty-minute delivery for up to 90 percent of domestic shipments while also reducing carbon emissions. After years of testing, Amazon wrote to the Federal Aviation Administration last summer to ask for permission to conduct limited commercial deliveries with its drones, attaching this diagram to show how the system would work. (Amazon insisted that we note that the diagram is not to scale.) Amazon is not the only company working toward such an automated future—­UPS, FedEx, Uber, and Google’s parent company, Alphabet, have similar programs—­but its plans offer the most detailed vision of what seems to be an impending reality, one in which parce­l-toting drones are a constant presence in the sky, doing much more than just delivering popcorn.

Article
The Skinning Tree·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Every year in Lusk, Wyoming, during the second week of July, locals gather to reenact a day in 1849 when members of a nearby band of Sioux are said to have skinned a white man alive. None of the actors are Native American. The white participants dress up like Indians and redden their skin with body paint made from iron ore.

The town prepares all year, and the performance, The Legend of Rawhide, has a cast and crew of hundreds, almost all local volunteers, including elementary school children. There are six generations of Rawhide actors in one family; three or four generations seems to be the average. The show is performed twice, on Friday and Saturday night.

The plot is based on an event that, as local legend has it, occurred fifteen miles south of Lusk, in Rawhide Buttes. It goes like this: Clyde Pickett is traveling with a wagon train to California. He tells the other Pioneers: “The only good Injun’s a dead Injun.” Clyde loves Kate Farley, and to impress her, he shoots the first Indian he sees, who happens to be an Indian Princess. The Indians approach the Pioneers and ask that the murderer give himself up. Clyde won’t admit he did it. The Indians attack the wagon train and, eventually, Clyde surrenders. The Indians tie Clyde to the Skinning Tree and flay him alive. Later, Kate retrieves her dead lover’s body and the wagon train continues west.

Cost of renting a giant panda from the Chinese government, per day:

$1,500

A recent earthquake in Chile was found to have shifted the city of Concepción ten feet to the west, shortened Earth’s days by 1.26 microseconds, and shifted the planet’s axis by nearly three inches.

Americans evacuated from Wuhan did Zumba.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Jesus Plus Nothing

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

At Ivanwald, men learn to be leaders by loving their leaders. “They’re so busy loving us,” a brother once explained to me, “but who’s loving them?” We were. The brothers each paid $400 per month for room and board, but we were also the caretakers of The Cedars, cleaning its gutters, mowing its lawns, whacking weeds and blowing leaves and sanding. And we were called to serve on Tuesday mornings, when The Cedars hosted a regular prayer breakfast typically presided over by Ed Meese, the former attorney general. Each week the breakfast brought together a rotating group of ambassadors, businessmen, and American politicians. Three of Ivanwald’s brothers also attended, wearing crisp shirts starched just for the occasion; one would sit at the table while the other two poured coffee. 

Subscribe Today