'Liberating' on whose terms?

I am watching television and, of course, what is showing is coverage of the war. It seems that the military penetration moving toward the heart Iraq is more difficult than we, the U.S. populace, were previously led to believe. It seems that the Iraqi civilians are not welcoming us with open arms bearing flowers and ointments. It seems that a sense of nationalism has risen among the Iraqis and it also seems that this has taken the Americans, the news anchors at least, by surprise. The news anchors state, with a touch of bewilderment, that the Iraqis appear to prefer Hussein's dictatorship over American occupation. These people, who provide the voice over for our visual of "War on Iraq," implicitly ask the question, "We are liberating the Iraqi people, why are they not more appreciative?"

This question, I believe, is most commonly asked by those who do not understand oppression. Not that I do, mind you, but I do have some ideas as to answer the 'why.' Why the liberated are not grateful for their liberators, is a question Langston Hughes dealt with in his short stories. He writes around the period of the Harlem Renaissance and in many of his short stories Hughes creates antagonists who are well intentioned. Some are white people who love art and find the "Negro" way of life so simple, so spiritual, so earthy. Some of these people have lots of money, and they love the poor Negro, so they give him wealth so he can create spiritualistic art, so he can sing spirituals for them and play out African beats on drums for them. They give him an education in what they want him to be educated in, they tell him what they expect from him, they tell him how he is to live, and then they wonder why this man is not more appreciative of what he has done for them.

Is not Iraq the same thing? America is bombing Iraq's cruel government, we are freeing the people from tyranny, and after we liberate them we will give them 'our' values, we will teach the Iraqi people 'our' way of life, we will install 'our' type of government and give them the opportunity to have the education 'we' think they should have. We will take them from where they are now and we will make them great. And then, when the people of Iraq hear of our plans, we wonder why they are not excited about the life we have planned for them. To me it seems the very thing Hughes was complaining about. In Iraq America is like the "white patron/antagonist" in Hughes's stories. Hughes wasn't saying he enjoyed being oppressed. Nor was he complaining about receiving funding for his art. Hughes was saying besides not wishing to be poor and oppressed, there are other things he'd rather not be. One of these things he'd rather not be was beholden. So why is America surprised that the Iraqi people feel the same way?

All too often "the liberator" is so full of the good work they feel they are doing they fail to ask on whose terms they are liberating "the oppressed." It is the same with Iraq. It's not that they don't want liberation. They don't want America's liberation. They may not love Hussein's rule, but if or when they break free of dictatorship, they want it to be on their own terms.