27 Sep. - 3 Oct. 2001
Issue No.553
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 27 Sep. - 3 Oct. 2001 Issue No.553 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Gambling on unity
Will the US strike Iraq? Dina Ezzat reviews the possibilities
Arab officials are increasing the scope and pace of their consultations to clarify the guidelines, and hopefully even some of the details, regarding a potential US-led coalition formed to wage "war on terrorism." Intensive Arab consultations at the highest levels also aim to formulate a somewhat unified Arab stand on such a "coalition."
The day the world stood still: taking in the disaster in New York
Secretary-General of the Arab League Amr Moussa was circumspect in statements issued earlier this week: "So far the situation with regard to the coalition is not clear; consequently there is no Arab stand on this coalition yet." Moussa, however, alluded to Arab reluctance to contribute militarily to any US strikes: "Obviously, the US does not need arms or armies from the Arab countries." He argued that the Arab contribution to this international effort will be determined when the Americans clarify the nature of the potential coalition.
US opacity has given the Arabs ample cause to wonder if expected strikes on countries that allegedly support or harbour terrorism will target one or several Arab countries. The reaction to any strikes is another matter preoccupying Arab officials and peoples.
Diplomats speaking to Al-Ahram Weekly say that so far the Arab governments do not have enough information to decide whether or not any of their countries could be targeted. "We have received assurances from Washington that the strikes will not hit Arab countries," commented one diplomat, but he hastened to add that these promises were not sufficiently explicit.
So while some officials seem confident that the US will not subject its allies to the embarrassment of participating in a coalition, whatever its nature, that could be used as an international licence to attack the Arabs, others are less sanguine about American intentions, saying only that they understand the US will not attack an Arab country unless it has to.
"You know how Americans operate. They act to please public opinion at home. So if they start attacks on Afghanistan and feel that American public opinion was not satisfied they may hit other countries," said one. And many Arab diplomats believe Iraq is the obvious option for such US strikes -- a more likely candidate than, say, Lebanon, Syria or Yemen. "In a sense, it is less embarrassing for the Arabs if Iraq is hit than if Lebanon or Syria is the target because, sad as it is, Iraq is subject to regular US attacks anyway in the name of retaliation for Baghdad's violation of the no-fly zones imposed by the US in the wake of the Gulf War," one diplomat commented.
The assumption, or concern, that Iraq could be subject to US strikes as part of "Operation Infinite Justice" is based on the Bush administration's clear intention, demonstrated earlier this year, to flex its military muscle in Iraq. It is also supported by some Western diplomats' remarks in conversations with their Arab counterparts. Leaks made during the past few days about alleged contacts between Mohamed Atta, one of the main suspects in the 11 September attacks, and Iraqi intelligence, also buttress conjectures that Iraq could be near the top of the US's hit list.
Earlier this week, US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld said US forces are moving into position to address "a world-wide problem" in an anti-terrorist campaign that could involve strikes on countries beyond Afghanistan.
These statements were made 24 hours after US Senator Jesse Helms had said Iraq would probably be a target of US military action. According to Helms, American forces may be "close to such an attack."
Iraqi diplomats told the Weekly that, while they do not rule out the possibility of a strike "as a part of the alleged US war against terror," they are not very worried, for they say they have received assurances through third parties that they will not be on the receiving end of US military action.
Moussa, who has been very clear in expressing his sympathy with the victims of the "shocking" tragedy of 11 September, and in emphasising the "unity" of the Arab stance against international terrorism, warned earlier this week against "any attempt to seize the opportunity to launch strikes against any Arab country." Speaking to reporters after a meeting in Jordan with King Abdullah, the current chair of the Arab summit, Moussa said that discussions of Iraq now should focus on ways to "lift the sanctions under which the Iraqi people has been suffering a great deal for the past 11 years." He added that targeting Arab countries "could turn the situation upside down" in view of the frustration and agitation the US administration's policies -- specifically, the indulgence it shows Israel's exercise of "state terrorism" against the Palestinians -- have caused in the Arab world.
Indeed, during the past few weeks, the Arab League has been trying to encourage all Arab states to refuse Iraq's inclusion in this matter. Moussa, sources suggest, has been able to secure the understanding of the Saudis, and to some extent that of the Kuwaitis. The secretary-general also seems to have obtained the support of the Arab summit chair, who is meeting tomorrow with US President George W Bush in Washington. Egypt, a key player in Arab consultations on the current state of affairs, is also reluctant to involve Iraq.
A consensus among Arab states to spare Iraq may be yet another step down the road that began at an Arab foreign ministers' meeting in January 1999, with moves to re-integrate Iraq, excluded from the Arab community since its invasion of Kuwait in August 1990.
"We are hoping for a significant step forward in our relations with our Arab brothers everywhere," Iraqi Foreign Minister Nagui Sabri said in an interview with the Weekly only hours before the 11 September attacks. He added: "We are hoping that our Arab brothers will make a concrete demonstration of the line they agreed on during the last Arab summit in Amman" -- to move towards closer ties with Iraq.
Iraq, its foreign minister says, is willing to take steps to settle past differences in an effort to encourage better ties with the entire Arab world. To serve this purpose, Sabri explained, Baghdad has proposed a new set of ideas to deal with the pending problem of POWs and soldiers who went missing in action during the Gulf War. In late 1998, when the US launched Operation Desert Fox, Baghdad ceased cooperating with the international committee that brought together Iraqi and Kuwaiti officials along with representatives of the US, several European countries and the Red Cross.
A few weeks ago, Iraq expressed willingness to cooperate on the POW file through an Arab forum, and suggested that Russia, China and India could join the proposed forum to handle the matter of the hundreds of prisoners -- Iraqis, Kuwaitis, Saudis and others -- outside the US's sphere of influence.
"We just want to deal with a humanitarian matter that affects the lives of so many families in Iraq and Kuwait," Sabri said. Iraq's ideas were forwarded earlier this month to an Arab foreign ministers' meeting, which handed them to the chair of the summit. King Abdullah will have to present the next Arab summit in Beirut with a progress report on the state of affairs between Iraq and Kuwait.
"We are hoping that the king will follow up on this matter; we heard nothing negative about these ideas from anyone at the ministerial meeting, including the members of the Saudi and Kuwaiti delegations," Sabri noted.
Sheikh Salem Al-Sabah, chair of Kuwait's National Committee for POWs and Individuals Missing in Action, told the Weekly his country does not mind working with any ideas, including those presented by Iraq, to settle "this humanitarian problem, which has been negatively affecting the lives of hundreds of Kuwaiti families." According to Al-Sabah, however, Kuwait has not received any of these ideas yet.
Still, the road ahead is not easy. For Kuwait to accept and consider the Iraqi ideas, Iraq has to present them to the international committee it has been boycotting for over two years. "The POW issue is not something that is directly handled by Iraq and Kuwait on bilateral basis. It is not for Kuwait to accept or reject these ideas without the proper consultations with the other members of the concerned international committee," said Rabi' Al-Adassani, executive director of Kuwait's National Committee.
Progress on the POW file, however, would be conducive to overall progress on the Iraq-Kuwait front, which "is essential to enforce Arab regional security, particularly in view of the current political disturbances in and around the region, caused by the failed peace process and concerns over military action near the Gulf if the US decides to launch strikes against Afghanistan," as one Arab diplomatic source commented.
"The situation is very critical," Moussa said earlier this week of regional stability. Addressing a group of Arab intellectuals, Moussa argued that the Arab world is faced by serious challenges: attempts to impose the Israeli version of peace; attempts to fragment the Arab order in favour of a Middle Eastern order where Israel has the upper hand; attempts to give Islam a bad image; and attempts to block Arab development. To overcome these attempts, he argued, closer Arab cooperation is imperative.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page