You'll all be familiar with Naomi Klein - you know, she of the view that if democracy comes to Iraq the war will still have been wrong, and those who opposed it will be able to claim the credit for that beneficial outcome anyway. What is it about her that makes me begin to think she might inhabit a strangely different world from the one I know? Today she's considering who the principal beneficiaries of terrorism in Iraq are, and who do you reckon that might be? The American-led occupying force, that's who. The subtitle on the paper version of Klein's article, accurately summarizing its content, says this straight up:
It is the US which benefits most from spreading fear in Iraq.For some reason, in the online version, the subtitle just replicates the title. Anyway, there you go: the delusional world of a section of the anti-war left. The Americans, clearly interested in, if not desperate for, a successful outcome to the intervention, seemingly fighting a terrorist insurgency, turn out to be the main beneficiaries of the terrorist insurgency.