U.S. repeats Britain's mistake of World War I

Roedad Khan, The Dawn, Asia News Network, Karachi

Talking about rulers who seek to grab other countries and aspire to dominate the world by force of arms, Mussolini said: "they all become mad, they lose their equilibrium in the clouds, quivering ambitions and obsessions -- and it is actually that mad passion which brought them to where they are".

Today America is led by a president who, in the words of Nelson Mandela, "has no foresight, who cannot think properly, who is now wanting to plunge the world into a holocaust".

The attack on the two Islamic states, Afghanistan and Iraq, neither of which was responsible for Sept. 11, turned the war into a clash between the United States and the Islamic world. The U.S. which had hitherto been seen as a benevolent power, lost its political innocence in the Muslim world.

"Liberated" Iraq like "liberated" Afghanistan is slipping deeper and deeper into the abyss. Saddam is gone only to be replaced by Paul Bremer, the American overlord and viceroy.

He deals with the Iraqis as ruthlessly as the British dealt with the Dervishes at Omdurman in 1898. "We are going to fight them and impose our will on them", Bremer declared in "liberated" Baghdad. Neither Gen. R.E.H. Dyer at Amritsar nor Gen. William C. Westmoreland in Vietnam could have put it any clearer.

Americans have set in motion violent religious and political battles in Iraq. Whether clerics should confine their activities to religious affairs or also seek a role in politics has been a matter of fierce debate among Shias for well over a century.

The old tensions within Shia Islam between two tendencies -- quietism and activism -- erupted in Iraq in March last in the power vacuum created by war and the collapse of the Baathist regime.

The most senior religious leader, Ali Sistani refused to let himself be dragged into the political turmoil and found himself the target of death threats. The young Muqtada Al-Sadr of Najaf and Muhammad Al-Fartusi in Baghdad, called for resistance to the American invaders and the establishment of an Islamic government.

This fierce struggle within Shia religious circles took an ominous turn on April 10 with the murder of Abdul-Majeed Al- Khoei, son of Abdal-Qasim, who had been brought to Najaf by American forces in the hope that he would collaborate and exert his influence in the city.

Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir Al-Hakim, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, who advocated an Islamic government, then adopted a pro-American pragmatic course when he returned to Najaf after 23 years in exile in Iran.

He was emerging as one of the most powerful of the Shia clerics collaborating with the Americans when he was killed along with 129 others in a car bomb attack in the holy city of Najaf on Aug. 29. Iraqi Shias blame the U.S. for inadequate security and failure to protect the Shia leader.

The military, political and moral dilemmas confronting Washington today differ in degree but not in kind from those that confronted Britain at the end of World War I. The capture of Baghdad on March 11, 1917 and the success of the army of Tigris raised the question of what was to be done with Mesopotamia (Greek name for Iraq).

To mark the capture of Baghdad, a proclamation was issued inviting the Arab leaders to participate in the government in collaboration with British authorities.

A Mesopotamian administration committee was set up to determine what form of government should be installed in Iraq. It was evident that either London was not aware of, or had given no thought to the population mix of the Mesopotamian provinces.

The antipathy between the minority Sunnis and the majority Shias, the rivalries of tribes and clans, the historic and geographic divisions of the country, made it difficult to reconcile rival interests and achieve a unified government that was at the same time representative, effective and widely supported.

The British nerves were on edge; a Holy war was proclaimed against Britain in the Shia city of Kerbala. In an article on Aug. 7, 1920, the Times wrote, "how much longer are valuable lives to be sacrificed in the vain endeavor to impose upon the Arab population an elaborate and expensive administration which they never asked for and do not want." It is amazing how, a century later, history is repeating itself in Iraq.

Paul Bremer said that several billion dollars would be needed to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure at a time when the federal budget deficit is at a record high.

The bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad and the killing of Ayatullah Muhammad Baqir Al-Hakim show that America took a country that was not a terrorist threat and turned it into one.

Bloodshed and terror continue -- the payoff of a policy spun from fantasies and lies. The American occupation is the problem. It is perceived by Iraqis as a confrontation and a humiliation.

America should turn the country over to a genuine international coalition headed by the United Nations and get out.