SAINT SALAM?
Nick Denton says some smart literary book agent should sign Salam Pax to a six-figure book deal and make an author out of him. Nick's case is solid--Salam's a good writer even in his second language, and he has a story to tell. There is no question that Salam is a witty writer, very engaging and better than most pros writing in their native tongue. Does Salam have a compelling story?Indeed he does. His story may be more compelling than any of us realize.
Ever since I discovered Salam's blog, which was sometime shortly before the war, I have been among his fans, cheerleaders and defenders. I never doubted that he was an authentic blogger living somewhere in or near Baghdad, and still don't. So please take the questions I'm about to raise in that spirit--I like the guy and wish him no ill. I come neither to bury him nor to praise him. But a few tidbits in his most recent posts have me puzzled. Even disturbed.
The first is in his most recent post, in which he says he spent a couple of days traveling around Iraq with a group called CIVIC, which stands for Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict. Salam says that they're moving around Iraq trying to get a handle on the number of civilians killed during the war. I Googled them and came up empty, so they don't seem to have a website up yet. But my search did lead me to this site for something called No More Innocent Victims, which purports to be a 9-11 victims' group but is in reality an anti-war group. It's not on a hate level with, say, the ANSWER communists, but its tilt is definitely against the American right to defend itself against terrorist attack. CIVIC, the group Salam is traveling with, looks similar to this No More Innocent Victims group. Its purpose, tallying civilian deaths in the recent Iraq war, seems aimed at pulling a Marc Herold and inflating the numbers to fit an anti-war and anti-American agenda. These aren't the sort of people a true Iraqi democrat should align with. CIVIC is likely a menace. Instead of cavorting with CIVIC, I'd suggest Salam look into efforts to document the savagery of Saddam's reign. CIVIC doesn't have Iraq's best interests at heart--if they are what I think they are, they opposed the very action that has given Salam and his countrymen their freedom. They don't care how many civilians were killed; they just want to score points against America and undermine our efforts to rebuild. Chronicling Saddam's ghastly killings would go a long way to reminding the average Iraqi just what has been won for them, and would be more constructive in the long term.
My other questions have less to do with what's on Salam's blog, but with what used to be there. Remember that famous story about him meeting John Burns of the New York Times? Where did it go? The story is no longer on his site. Why? And how did he get access to the hotel where Western journalists were staying? I can't imagine that the average Iraqi could have gotten an audience with Burns. He probably had help of some kind. In an earlier post, Salam mentioned two clubs that the Iraqi National Congress had taken over to use as base camps. Those two clubs were named in the original post, but have since been redacted with asterisks. Salam hints, indicates or jokes that he has a membership in them. The second one, redacted to "Iraqi ***** Club," is the Iraqi Hunting Club, an exclusive Baath-only facility recently written about in the New York Times. The average non-Baath Iraqi probably couldn't care less about what the INC is or isn't doing at this club. They may even revel in its conversion to something other than a Baath house. But Salam seems to care about it an awful lot. If Salam is a member of the Iraqi Hunting Club, what does this say about him and his position in Iraqi society? His concern about it and another club (the Mansour Social Club, apparently, which seems to be another Baath elite hangout) suggests a connection of some kind. And if he really is connected to these clubs, he's probably connected to the Baath Party itself.
So we may have a blogger, everyone's darling, who is on the one hand working with a group whose goal is creating anti-American propaganda by inflating civilian casualty figures, and on the other hand is connected to Iraq's evil ancien regime.
How might he be connected? Salam seems to be a young guy, probably college age or a little older, from the style and tone of his writing. He could be a party member himself, but I doubt it--the "Support Iraqi Democracy" banner on his site at least suggests that he's not an actual Baathist. He mentions an uncle in a couple of posts, an uncle who's a banker with some authority. In a totalitarian society, how does one get to such a position? By either going along with the rulers, or becoming one of them. The uncle could be his connection. Salam also never mentions a father; that omission could mean something too.
My point in this post isn't to disparage Salam, but to raise legitimate questions. Who is he? What did he do before the war? What will he do now? Was he just an average Iraqi, or was he connected in some way to the Baath regime we just spent blood and treasure to destroy?
I think we need some answers, at least to that last question.
UPDATE: Diana Moon sends the following:
Bryan is raising some perfectly legitimate questions.
About those edits. I did them. To protect Salam's identity. I believe strongly that if you choose to blog anonymously the decision should be respected. When I received Salam's email, I was so euphoric that he had survived, and from finally having a phone conversation with a newly-free man, that I put up the post unedited. My bad. I should have known: as soon as I did, the post was broadcast throughout the internet, so the juxtaposition looks suspicious. The decision had nothing to do with politics, and everything to do with privacy.
Salam is now a blogger like any other, and Bryan is free to question whether his background (as opposed to his individual identity, which is irrelevant) has influenced his perspective.
May I add one final thought about the situation in Iraq? It appears to be a chaotic mess, the looting is a shame, but there have been no credible reports of mass vigilantism, or even, for that matter, minor vigilantism. That's a credit to the people of Iraq, isn't it? And to their "occupiers?"
It certainly is, and it's also an argument that we shouldn't worry about Salam the way we did prior to and during the war. He no longer seems to be in any danger, either from the new regime or the old. So like any other blogger, he's fair game.