Tense Baghdad-Washington relations reach anticlimax?<\/p>\n
By Riza Sihbudi<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Iraqi President Saddam Hussein said on Nov. 17
\nthat his country was not in the least interested to engage in a
\ndirect confrontation with the United States and hoped that a
\ndiplomatic solution would be sought so that a fresh military
\nconflict would not break out in the Middle East.<\/p>\n
A few days later, Saddam allowed all members of the United
\nNations Special Commission (UNSCOM) to return to Iraq. Saddam's
\nunexpected softening attitude turned out to earn a good response
\nfrom U.S. President Bill Clinton, who offered additional
\n\"humanitarian aid\" to Baghdad with his proposal that Iraq be
\nallowed to sell more oil in order that it may purchase greater
\nquantities of foodstuffs and medicines.<\/p>\n
Under the UN Security Council Resolution No. 986\/1995, known
\nas the oil-for-food formula, Iraq is allowed to sell its oil
\nthrough the United Nations to the maximum value of US$2 billion
\nper semester.<\/p>\n
The proceeds can be utilized only to purchase foodstuffs,
\nmedicines and other basic necessities for the Iraqi people, who
\nhave fallen victim to the UN-imposed sanctions and embargo.<\/p>\n
According to Washington, Clinton has proposed that either the
\nperiod in which the program carried out under this formula be
\nextended or the variety of goods that Iraq is allowed to purchase
\nbe expanded.<\/p>\n
Clinton has notified his proposal to two permanent members of
\nthe Security Council, Russia and France, which (along with China)
\nhave shown their apparent dislike for the U.S. military approach
\nin dealing with Iraq.<\/p>\n
Clinton has even especially asked the favor of Russia's
\nforeign minister, Yevgeny Primakov, to mediate in the conflict
\nbetween Iraq and the United States, which began to resurface in
\nlate October when Saddam expelled from Iraq U.S. citizens serving
\nat UNSCOM.<\/p>\n
Many quarters are harboring the hope that Saddam's softening
\nattitude and Clinton's positive response may ease the tension
\nbetween Iraq and the United States and consequently avert the
\noutbreak another Persian Gulf war.<\/p>\n
During the last two decades, nations in this region have
\nwitnessed the outbreak of two big wars in the Gulf area, namely
\nthe Iran-Iraq War spanning from 1980 to 1988 and the Persian Gulf
\nWar between Iraq and the U.S. and its allies from 1990 to 1991.<\/p>\n
It is only natural, therefore, that people in the region would
\nhate to see the outbreak of another armed conflict as this would
\nonly plunge innocent people into a deeper pit of suffering. Is it
\ntrue, however, that the softening of attitudes on the part of
\nSaddam and Clinton would by itself bring about peace to this
\nregion?<\/p>\n
As has been written in various Iraqi publications recently,
\nwhether or not a war will break out, one obvious thing is that
\nBaghdad has secured a \"victory\" and the U.S., on the other hand,
\nhas sustained a \"defeat\".<\/p>\n
This evaluation may be highly subjective. Nevertheless, if we
\nstudy the development in the political arena in the Middle East
\nin nearly a month of the recent Iraqi-U.S. crisis, we may say
\nthat this evaluation is not widely off the mark. It is evident
\nthat Clinton's obsession to repeat the success of his country in
\nthe Persian Gulf War has failed to materialize.<\/p>\n
During the Gulf War, the U.S. was able to unite military
\nforces of at least 28 countries, Arab or otherwise, to attack
\nIraq. Now there are only two countries, Britain and Israel, that
\nhave openly supported Clinton's plan for military action against
\nBaghdad.<\/p>\n
So, in the present Iraqi-U.S. crisis, not a single Arab
\ncountry is willing to take sides with Washington, not even
\nKuwait, which became the victim of Iraq's aggression during the
\nGulf War.<\/p>\n
Although Kuwait condemned Saddam as being the cause of the
\ncrisis, it rejected any form of U.S. military intervention
\nagainst Baghdad. The same attitude has been displayed by former
\nfoes of Iraq such as Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia.<\/p>\n
The popularity of Uncle Sam among countries in the Middle East
\nhas been declining since its failure to pressure Israeli Prime
\nMinister Benjamin Netanyahu to abide by the peace agreement with
\nthe Palestinians.<\/p>\n
The unwillingness of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab
\nEmirates (three influential Arab countries generally known as
\nU.S. \"friends\") to attend the fourth \"Middle East and North
\nAfrica (MENA) Economic Summit\", co-sponsored by the U.S. and
\nIsrael, in Doha, Qatar, from Nov. 16 to Nov. 18 is another
\nindication of Washington's dimming image in the Middle East.<\/p>\n
In the meantime, Israel has ignored UN resolutions in greater
\nfrequency than Iraq (and also Libya, the Sudan and Iran, to which
\nthe U.S. continues to adopt a hostile attitude).<\/p>\n
The U.S., nevertheless, has never accused Israel of \"opposing
\nthe desire of the international community\", a label that the
\nWhite House has been using to corner Iraq.<\/p>\n
It is not clear to which \"international community\" Clinton
\nrefers. It may well be that what he means is \"the international
\nZionist community\", considering that Iraq, Libya, the Sudan and
\nIran are known for their strong rejection of Israeli domination
\nand hegemony in the Middle East and also for their opposition to
\nthe U.S.-initiated Middle East peace scenario -- which is now
\nstuck.<\/p>\n
Therefore, it is likely that Saddam's softening attitude is
\nlinked with the victories he has scored in his short-term
\nobjectives by triggering the present Iraqi-U.S. crisis.<\/p>\n
They are the increase in the price of oil in the world market,
\nthe breaking up of the former U.S. coalition from the Gulf War,
\nthe greater sympathy from the international community for the
\nplight of Iraqis as a result of the U.S.-sponsored UN embargo and
\nthe widening anti-U.S. attitude among most Middle Eastern
\nnations.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, Clinton's positive response may be
\ninterpreted as an admission that the U.S. success in the Gulf War
\nsix years ago is nothing more than a mere exception which would
\nbe difficult to repeat.<\/p>\n
If this assumption is correct, it is very likely that the
\npresent Iraqi-U.S. crisis could find a settlement on the
\nnegotiation table although the U.S. keeps increasing its military
\nmuscle in the Gulf region -- especially now that former U.S.
\npresident Jimmy Carter has expressed his willingness to act as a
\nmediator.<\/p>\n
Unless, of course, U.S. arrogance underlined by the spirit of
\nneocolonialism makes this superpower unable to read these \"signs
\nof the time\".<\/p>\n
The writer is a researcher at the Indonesian Institute of
\nSciences.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/tense-baghdad-washington-relations-reach-anticlimax-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}