U.S. versus Iraq
What started initially as a row between the United Nations and Iraq on the question of international arms inspection has turned into a conflict essentially between Washington and Baghdad. Given the enmity they have for one another, going back to the Gulf War seven years ago, it is easy to see why the tension has escalated and is now threatening to become a fully armed conflict.
The bottom line is that Iraq remains persistent against allowing any Americans taking part in the UN's inspection team, while the United States is equally obsessed about their experts being permitted to participate.
Underlying the conflict, however, as is typical in any international conflict, is the mutual suspicion that the two harbor over each other's intentions. Iraq, already humiliated by the continuous monitoring by the United Nations of its arms producing capability, has naturally objected to the presence of Americans -- even if they represent the world body and not their government -- knowing that they would share the information with American intelligence. The United States has been consistent in its badgering of Iraq, which it believes to be still capable of producing weapons of mass destruction, and therefore a threat to the Middle East region.
The solution to the problem would have been simple if every one, including the United Nations, had kept a cool head and a clear perspective of the issue at stake. The United Nations could have easily replaced the American experts in the inspection team.
Instead however, the conflict has been widely politicized by both leaders in Iraq and United States. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has turned Washington's threat to his advantage, mobilizing even greater support for his leadership and intensifying anti-American sentiments. He has found a convenient scapegoat for everything that has gone wrong with his country, including the hardship his people have endured resulting from the UN-sponsored economic sanctions. Judging by U.S. President Clinton's daily remarks on the subject, he is not completely innocent of fueling the tension and bringing it to its present height. His tough rhetoric does not help the situation, and appears to be more addressed to the American audience.
Both leaders are exploiting and turning the issue to their own political advantage. But they do so at the expense of the rest of the world. Ultimately, if war does break out, it would be at the expense of their own people. If anyone can prevent war, it is Clinton and Saddam, and the United Nations.
It's time for the United Nations to reseize the lead and initiative from the United States in dealing with Iraq, and put the conflict back in its true perspective. Moderate elements in the UN Security Council, most notably Russia and France, and Secretary-General Kofi Annan, should be on the front line in the negotiations with Baghdad. The United States, given its deep enmity toward Saddam Hussein, should lay low and allow the UN diplomats to resolve the issue.
The United Nations and Iraq should compromise. Baghdad's request to exclude American experts in the UN inspection team would be a small price to pay to avoid armed conflict. Iraq for its part should comply with the UN inspection team. The outcome of the inspection will determine the future of the various UN sanctions imposed on Iraq since the end of the Gulf War. The Iraqi people have already suffered a lot from the UN economic embargo. They do not need to suffer any further. The sooner this conflict is resolved, the better for everyone.