JP\/7\/RIZA
\nWorld waits for U.S. pledge after the war<\/p>\n
Riza Sihbudi
\nIndonesian Institute of Sciences
\n(LIPI)
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
The United Nations (UN) Security Council finally held its
\nemergency meeting on March 27, following strong pressure from the
\nArab League and the Non-Aligned Movement. Indonesia was among
\nthose UN member countries which actively pushed for an open
\nemergency meeting, one in which all UN members could participate,
\nto debate the U.S.-led aggression against Iraq.<\/p>\n
Still, the fact that the UN finally decided to convene this
\nmeeting shows increasing pressure from most nations, urging that
\nthe UN should not just sit on the fence in the face of barbarity
\nin Iraq -- quite unlike its prompt reaction against Iraqi
\naggression against Kuwait in 1991. What the U.S. and the UK are
\ndoing to Iraq today is not very different from what Iraq did to
\nKuwait then.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it is understandable that people in many countries
\nhave been urging that the UN be disbanded, as it has proven
\nitself incapable of protecting a weak country against the
\natrocities of a strong country. There is more to this, of course.<\/p>\n
Iraq has even accused UN Secretary General Kofi Annan of
\ncomplicity in smoothing the way for the aggression. Just a day
\nbefore the deadline of the ultimatum that Bush had given to
\nSaddam Hussein, Annan decided to withdraw the UN inspection team
\nfrom Iraq. Annan may thus go down in world history as the weakest
\nand most timid UN Secretary-General.<\/p>\n
If theoretical and mathematical calculations are correct, the
\ncollapse of the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq is only a matter of
\ntime. Anyway, the military might of the U.S. and the UK is far
\nsuperior to Iraq's military strength. This is indeed a very
\nunjust \"war\" -- or to be more apt, aggression or invasion -- that
\nlacks parity.<\/p>\n
In the aftermath of the 1991 Kuwait war, the UN -- by order of
\nthe U.S. -- exacted economic, political and military penalties on
\nIraq. Embargoes and other kinds of sanctions in virtually every
\nsector of life were imposed on Iraq, which was allowed only to
\npurchase food and medicine supplies. Besides which, the UN, again
\nby \"order\" of the U.S., also disarmed Iraq.<\/p>\n
Saddam is undeniably a \"monster\" for his neighbors and his own
\npeople -- and, perhaps, he is also a hoodlum, as he is fond of
\nextorting the wealth of the rich emirs around him.<\/p>\n
Innumerable people have died as a result of his cruel
\npolitical machine since he took power in 1979. However, most
\nIraqis -- including 60 percent of the marginalized Shiites --
\nhate the American and British aggressors more than Saddam. This
\nis why the hope of the U.S. and the UK that their soldiers would
\nreceive a warm welcome from the Iraqis has remained a dream.<\/p>\n
Besides, where is the morality of the U.S. and the UK? In the
\n1980s, both clearly had their share in Iraq's military build-up
\nunder Saddam. Both have pocketed millions, or even billions, of
\nU.S. dollars from this Iraqi strongman. Then, they fully
\nsupported Saddam when he felt the urge to attack Iran to prevent
\nthe spread of the Islamic revolution.<\/p>\n
After blocking Ayatollah Khomeini's influence, it is now
\nSaddam's turn to be destroyed. Iraq had thus first been weakened
\nbefore finally it was subjected to a massive attack, which has
\nled to grave doubts as to how Iraq could possibly win the war.<\/p>\n
The end of Saddam's power -- if this comes about -- would have
\na great impact on the Middle Eastern region. First of all, the
\nimpact would be favorable if the U.S. and the UK, plus the UN,
\nare able to encourage the establishment of a new, democratic-
\ninclined regime in Iraq.<\/p>\n
This would be in line with the earlier commitment of the big
\npowers to \"liberate\" the Iraqi people and restore their rights
\nover their oil wealth potential.<\/p>\n
Secondly, if and when Saddam loses the war, the U.S. must
\nimmediately fulfill is pledge to establish a free Palestinian
\nstate. The root cause of acute conflicts in the Middle East is
\nthe Palestinian question, in the sense that the Palestinians may
\nenjoy their legitimate rights to establish and own a free and
\nsovereign state that is recognized and protected by international
\ninstitutions.<\/p>\n
U.S. support for the establishment of a Palestinian state will
\nminimize the anti-U.S. sentiment prevailing among the Arab
\nnations. As a consequence, terrorist acts will also be reduced.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, after a democratic government is installed in Iraq
\nand a free Palestinian state is established, the U.S. must also
\nencourage democratization in those Arab countries that have
\nbecome its main allies. The emergence of new \"monsters\" in the
\nArab world would thus be prevented. This condition may also usher
\nin a new era for the Middle East, if it can serve as a zone of
\npeace and democracy.<\/p>\n
However, if the U.S. fails to realize these three aims after
\nthe end of Saddam's power in Iraq, political instability will
\nintensify in the region, especially if the U.S. is only concerned
\nwith controlling the oil of Iraq and other Middle Eastern
\ncountries and eliminating a military threat to Israel. The impact
\nthat the end of Saddam's rule might would be highly unfavorable.<\/p>\n
The invasion of Iraq will likely be followed by an invasion of
\nIran on the same pretext: The destruction of weapons of mass
\ndestruction. Even Libya and Saudi Arabia could be next, as the
\nmain objective of the U.S. is to control 80 percent of the
\nworld's oil deposits.<\/p>\n
That Iran will be another target is obvious from the U.S.'s
\nattempt to raise an issue on Iran's nuclear capability. The
\nPalestinian question will soon be forgotten, as George W. Bush
\nneeds support from Jewish-American lobbyists to ensure his re-
\nelection in 2004. If that is the case, then violence would almost
\ncertainly escalate in the Middle East.<\/p>\n
We can only hope that Bush will rely on his common sense more
\nthan has up until now, and refrain from going against the wishes
\nof the international community for the second time.<\/p>\n
The writer also chairs the Indonesian Society for Middle East
\nStudies (ISMES).<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/jp7riza-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}