Al-Ahram Weekly | Region | Iraq: what's next?

		29 August - 4 Sept. 2002 Issue No. 601 Region	Current issue Previous issue Site map
Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875		Recommend this page

Iraq: what's next?
Iraq's dilemma is bound to be a topic of discussion among Arab foreign ministers Dina Ezzat

Click to view caption
Activist Medea Benjamin protests against an Iraqi war during a speech by US President Bush in the Stockton Civic Memorial Auditorium on Friday. Benjamin was quickly taken away
There is not much that the upcoming council for Arab foreign ministers can really do with respect to Iraq's predicament. The council does not have the means, power, or, for that matter, the will to declare a unilateral Arab lifting of international sanctions imposed on Iraq since its 1990 invasion of Kuwait. The council, too, lacks the means -- presuming that it had the will -- to persuade Baghdad to permit immediate entrance to arms inspectors and thus deny the US administration a good part of its pretext for launching a military operation against the sanction- devastated state.
Indeed, the Iraqi situation has not yet been put on the agenda of the council's meeting. Iraqi diplomats in Cairo say that they have not asked the Arab League secretariat to add the matter to the topics ministers are to discuss. The secretariat of the Arab League is not saying whether it is putting the matter as such on the agenda. There will, however, be an item related to the many threats facing several Arab states. Iraq, Arab League sources say, will be discussed under this item.
But as an Arab League source noted, council members could add Iraq as an indepedent item to their programme during the first session of the meeting next week when the agenda is adopted by the participating member states. However, an Iraqi diplomat in Cairo argued that such a move would be "unlikely" as council members are well aware that they have little power to address Iraq's predicament.
Arab opposition to a US military strike against Iraq was stated during the Beirut Arab Summit, last March, in as strong language as Baghdad could obtain from the US's Arab friends and foes. Moreover, a prompt return of the UN arms inspectors to Iraq to complete their mission which they began more than a decade ago is being negotiated between Iraq and the UN with the involvement of the Arab League.
Meanwhile, Iraq's relations with its Gulf neighbours have been taking a slow but sure turn for the better. Iraq is currently working with both the UN and the Arab League to return the contents of the Kuwaiti National Archive. Statements coming from Baghdad about Kuwaiti POWs have been more sensitive to the Kuwaiti point of view than they have in the past. High-ranking Kuwaiti officials have expressed carefully-worded opposition to a strike, highlighting the impact on the Iraqi people. Influential Saudi Arabia has reiterated, time and again, that it will not permit the US use of its facilities to launch a strike.
None of which is to say that Iraq will not be a major topic of the discussions that customarily take place alongside the meeting. "Iraq is on everybody's mind," said Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa.
Certain to be discussed is the possibility that the US will strike Iraq. This matter is subject to different assessments. Some Arab quarters believe that a strike is inevitable, even if Iraq allows inspectors back in. The US administration is not linking the strike to the return of inspectors, but is presenting it as part of its "war against terrorism".
Actually, US officials are quite open about their goal of effecting a regime change in Baghdad -- something the American president says his country owes to "civilisation". And, according to US Secretary of State Colin Powell, "The United States reserves its option to do whatever it believes might be appropriate to see if there can be a regime change." Powell added, "US policy is that, regardless of what the inspectors do, the people of Iraq and the people of the region would be better off with a different regime in Baghdad."
More recently the US has given an indication that it does not intend to rush its plans to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. "I am a patient man," US President George W Bush said when it became clear that there was mounting international, and even British, opposition to Washington's talk about a strike against Iraq. Actually, Bush is now facing increasing opposition from American intellectuals and some of the general public who are against a war in the face of such widespread international opposition. Opposition to a strike is even coming from people in Bush's own party who fear that even talk of war could harm the Republicans' image in the lead up to the congressional elections scheduled for November.
"If the strike is inevitable I don't think it will take place before November," commented a senior Arab diplomatic source. He added, "What we need to do is to work as much as we can during the next few weeks to try to reduce the possibility that there will be a war." For Arabs to minimise the chances of a US strike against Iraq requires additional lobbying for international support among officials and the general public. But, said the diplomatic source, it also means more "encouragement for, persuasion of and even pressure on" Iraq to permit entrance to inspectors. "If Iraq allows inspectors in, it will deal a major blow to any US plans to launch a military strike," he added.
Encouraging Iraq to show more resolve to settle the inspectors' issue during its talks with the UN is something that will certainly figure high on the agenda of talks that Arab League Secretary-General Moussa will hold with Iraqi Foreign Minister Nagi Sabri Al-Hadithi.
Moreover, Arab officials also have to discuss the rumour that Qatar or Jordan will offer to let Washington launch a strike using their facilities, in the event that a strike appears inevitable. In Baghdad on Monday for talks with Iraqi officials, Qatari Foreign Minister Hamid Bin Jassim made confusing statements about this matter: "The Americans have not yet asked us for further facilities or for permission [to use Qatari airspace]".
Israeli statements to the effect that it intends to take part in the war "when" it happens are bound to be subject to serious discussion during the Arab meeting, particularly in view of Israel's declared intention to violate the airspace of neighbouring Arab states to strike Iraq. "Israel has nothing to do with Iraq and it does not need to involve itself in this matter," said Moussa. He added that Israeli statements about participating in a war against Iraq and violating Arab airspace are revealing of its intentions to try to reconfigure the region in a way "that best fits Israeli interests". In any case, Moussa argues, Israel's statements "are extremely serious and rude. They require a reaction at the same level".
Whether or not Israel participates in a strike against Iraq, Arabs will have to consider carefully how to react in the event that a war takes place. Such a war could foster a wide range of negative consequences not only for Iraq, but for the entire region. First, there are humanitarian concerns, one of which is the fate of those who will be made refugees by such a war. Of course there are manifold economic and political ramifications. In view of the weakness of the Iraqi opposition overseas and the enigmatic nature of Iraqi opposition at home the sort of regime that will replace Saddam Hussein's remains an open question.
Throughout the Arab world, commentators have been speaking out against what seems to be becoming a trend whereby the US administration seeks to have removed heads of state it does not like. The US has said it will not deal with Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, it said it will topple Saddam Hussein, all of which leads to the question of who will be next. In the meantime, Syria, Lebanon, and even Saudi Arabia have been suggested by observers as potential future targets of US military might.
But most important of all, Arab officials need to think of how they will deal with an outraged public opinion if a strike is launched. Most Arab regimes, especially those with close ties to the US, are already facing serious problems with their citizens over the US's increasingly flagrant bias towards Israel. So, if the US decides that it wants to add to the misery in Iraq, then its friends in the Arab world, as Arab diplomats admit, will have their work cut out for them when it comes to obtaining public support for the superpower's plans.

Send a letter to the Editor Recommend this page

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