First came Khan, now Bush / Mongols, Americans -- in Baghdad, invaders seem similar
When it comes to fighting a war in Iraq, the United States and its most famous predecessors -- the Mongols of the 13th century -- have a lot in common. Both the Mongols and the Bushes, for instance, attacked Iraq twice.
Saddam Hussein vilified the Americans who attacked his country as the "new Mongols." And it was not the first time the Iraqi leader had compared U.S. invaders to the Mongol hordes. In 1991, he likened former President George Bush to Hulegu Khan, the warlord grandson of Genghis Khan, who sacked Baghdad in 1258.
But in some ways, the American-led attack doesn't hold a candle to the Mongols' assault.
The Mongolian version of "shock and awe" so devastated Baghdad that the city was left unrecognizable. Homes and mosques were razed and between 200,000 and 800,000 people were killed. The war's chroniclers said the Tigris River ran red with blood and then black from ink after the barbarians threw the Caliph of Baghdad's library into the river.
The Mongolian generals struck such terror into the hearts of the Iraqis that the caliph not only agreed to hand over all his riches but 700 princesses as well, in exchange for his life. The Mongols, however, ignored the offer, rolling the ruler of Baghdad into a carpet and trampling him to death with horses.
After their military victory, the Mongols spent 17 days looting Baghdad. Now the city is being looted again, but this time it is not the conquerors but the conquered who are doing the pillaging.
Still, there are some obvious similarities in the two campaigns. Both invading forces used superior military technology to their advantage. The Americans, of course, have smart bombs and bunker busters. For the Mongols, it was a skilled cavalry and catapults that hurled rocks and burning oil.
In 1258, news of the capital's destruction led to the easy capture of towns and villages such as Hilla, Kufa and Basra, just as Baghdad's fall led to the rapid capitulation of forces defending Kirkuk and Mosul.
Both war machines also relied on allies, though the Mongols put together a more impressive coalition, with Uzbeks, Kazaks, Georgians and other groups joining in the assault.
Mongolian historian Shagdaryn Bira suggests that ideological differences helped fuel both wars.
"Mongolia's nomadic and shamanic culture came into conflict with the values of Islamic peoples. The U.S. is a product of Christian and European values that also found conflict in Iraq," he said. "I am not saying that the Mongols or the U.S. purposely pursued a holy war, but the lack of common values led to war rather than compromise."
Bira also contends that both superpowers were attracted by Iraq's riches.
"Of course, the Mongols had an economic interest. They were nomadic and produced little, so the treasures of Persia were tempting," he said, "just as the lure of oil tempts the United States."
Yet Bira and other academics agree that there are some stark differences between the campaigns.
The Mongols captured Baghdad in a mere four days, for instance, while it took U.S. forces three weeks.
Perhaps the most striking difference in the two conflicts is that the Mongols not only brought down the Arab culture's most prosperous city but destroyed a 500-year-old dynasty. At its peak, the Abbasid caliphs, who ruled from 750 to 1258, claimed lands stretching from Central Asia in the east to North Africa and Spain in the west. That far eclipsed the territory ruled by Hussein's Baath Party, which came to power 40 years ago and has suffered two failed wars in Iran and Kuwait.
On the other hand, both the invading Mongol and U.S. armies were warmly welcomed by Iraqis who had been abused by their rulers. While Muslims saw the Mongols as invaders, Iraqi Christians considered Hulegu Khan to be a liberator, just as the Kurds and Shiites see U.S. and British troops.
"Throughout its supremacy, like an insatiable leech, (Baghdad) had swallowed up the entire world," wrote the Armenian chronicler, Kirakos of Ganja. "Now it restored all that had been taken. It was punished for the blood it had shed and the evil it had done."
Yet the beneficence shown to the Christians did little to change the world's impression of the Mongols. Like the Americans, they were loathed in the Arab world.
And what do modern Mongols think of the war in Iraq?
The Mongolian government supports Washington and has joined the "coalition of the willing." It has even offered to send troops to help protect mosques and historical places when the conflict ends.
And though Mongolia's army has greatly fallen from its Genghis Khan glory days, the country still prides itself on its medieval legacy of conquest. Each summer, nomads on horseback ride to the steppes to compete in wrestling, horse racing and archery.
"I would fight Saddam Hussein to free the Iraqi people," said Togmid-Shirim, in the Mongolian capital of Ulan Bator. "We Mongols have a long history of warfare and are known for our skilled archers. We are educated and precise. We could help."