Who will save Iraq?
By
Salama A Salama
The final communiqué of the emergency gathering by Iraq's neighbours held in Riyadh may have helped dispel a measure of the confusion that has dominated their responses to the fall of the Iraqi regime. That document, however, did not mention the positions taken by the US, Europe or UN regarding the situation in Iraq.
Attendees reiterated their support for Iraqi sovereignty and self-determination, and said that the international sanctions should be lifted only at the request of a legitimate government. They drew particular attention to the right of the Iraqi people to manage the country's oil wealth. As for the current situation, participants said occupying forces must uphold the Fourth Geneva Convention which calls for ensuring security and the distribution of aid to the Iraqi people.
Regarding the role of the UN, the communiqué called for it to play a decisive role in post-war Iraq. Meeting attendees share this position with the EU, which has actually been more vociferous than Iraq's neighbours about the need for UN involvement in matters beyond distributing aid, like paving the way towards Iraqi self-rule. The US opposes such a role because it wants to dominate Iraqi affairs.
This point, in particular, should have been emphasised by meeting attendees. It is illogical that the US would be given a free hand to set up a new regime that is compliant with its interests, and dependent on a group of Iraqi opposition figures -- at the forefront of which is Ahmed Al-Chalabi -- with close ties to the US intelligence apparatus.
It is not in the interests of Iraq or Arab countries that a regime under US tutelage takes power in Baghdad. Such a government would become a source of concern and controversy for its Arab neighbours and Iran. Hence, it is important that the UN takes charge of overseeing the political process that will pave the way for the establishment of an interim government in which all Iraqi political forces are represented, and which oversees the promulgation of a constitution and the holding of elections. We should pay no heed to US excuses that the UN is unqualified to handle the situation in Iraq, because the international body dealt with similar issues in East Timor, Bosnia, Cambodia and other countries. Washington wants to run Iraq's affairs as an occupying power for obvious reasons.
Nonetheless, the Arabs will pay a high price in the near future for ignoring their responsibility to assist Iraq. So far contacts between Arab countries and figures from the independent Iraqi opposition have been extremely limited.
Kuwait hosted a group of independent opposition figures headed by Adnan Pachachi that included Adeeb Al- Gader and Mahdi Al-Hafez. These men have long records in the service of their country, having turned their backs on Saddam's regime and distanced themselves from the Americans and Britons. Pachachi 's group opposes the plan proposed by US "Viceroy" Garner for establishing a temporary administration in which Iraqis are given the role of advisers. Instead, they call for the UN Security Council to appoint an international representative specialised in Iraqi affairs to hold a general conference attended by all Iraqi factions and public figures. Such a conference would select an interim administration charged with drawing up a draft constitution and preparing for elections. This group has been visiting Egypt recently and was received by President Mubarak.
The current dilemma lies in the fact that the US insists on acting like a colonising country, shaping Iraq's future by force. There are many similarities between the positions of the EU and Iraq's neighbours which could form a basis for joint Arab-European efforts, as well as a political role for the Arab League and UN in reconstructing Iraq. Surrendering to American obstinacy and hegemony over Iraq's future without the slightest resistance will prove a costly and irremediable mistake for the Arab people.
