The Malta Independent
The first anniversary of the invasion of Iraq by a US led coalition was marked with extreme instability. It was one of the worst weeks, in terms of human costs, since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
President Bush is learning through bitter experience that America`s military might, effective as it is in winning wars, is much less so in keeping peace. The expectation that the majority of the Iraqis would consider the US and its allied forces as liberators and would co-operate to install some form of democracy that would remain grateful to the US for ridding it of a tyrant, is proving totally misplaced and unrealistic.
Anyone who dares to read the history of Iraq and Mesopotamia should have known that democracy and freedom are quite alien to the culture of that land. It is clear that whilst the method and cost of entry into Iraq could have been well calculated, the cost and method of exit are much less clear and have not been properly planned. Unless handled with extreme diligence both the permanence or the exit could bring incalculable strife and pain which would make Saddam`s atrocities look mild.` It would also provide very poor credentials for President Bush`s re-election bid come November.
Events are adding credibility to the claim that upon acceding to Presidency the Bush administration was obsessed with the elimination of Saddam and neglected much more serious threats which culminated in the September 11 terrorism disaster. Chief White House counter-terrorism expert Richard Clarke in his recent book `Against All Enemies` indicts the Bush administration that it not only had misplaced priorities prior to September 11th, but perhaps more seriously, it compounded such misjudgements by attempting to re-assert US dented ego by invading Iraq rather than persist in the pursuit of the true terrorists holed up in the Afghan caves.
President Bush is being forced to approach his bid for re-election with a record of misjudgements which make him unfit to occupy the most powerful post in the world. He misjudged the threat of Al Queda before September 11th (his recent defence that if he knew that terrorists were going to attack New York on that day he would have taken all precautions, is pathetic). He misjudged unproven links between Al Queda and the Saddam Hussein regime. His misjudged Iraq`s possession of weapons of mass destruction. He misjudged the timing of the invasion of Iraq which could have assembled more gradually allowing time consensus building around UN approval, and he misjudged the reaction of the Iraq people to the invading forces.
It is very doubtful whether such liability could be countered by a very rich election campaign funds chest and the fact that the American economy seems to be consolidating its growth and producing employment in good time to reach a peak by next fall.
The truth is that President Bush was planning to spearhead his re-election campaign on a tridente of solid economic performance, strong leadership in countering the terrorist threats and the successful elimination of the regime of one world`s most despicable dictators, installing instead a pro-American nascent democracy to serve as a showcase for the rest of the Middle East. Two of these three strengths are turning into political liabilities as the campaign ticks off the remaining weeks till the start of November.
The perversity of the situation in Iraq could be dawning on Bush with cruel intensity. Rather than being considered as liberators US troops in Iraq are being considered as occupiers and are being persecuted by the same people whom they liberated at very great expense. Even if withdrawal were to be possible, the fallout from an unplanned withdrawal which would leave a power vacuum to be filled by a nearly certain bloody civil war, will hardly be conducive to the image of a US pretending to use its sole super-power status with responsibility and due leadership.
Attempts to fabricate some sort of power transfer to some domestic representative body which would invite the US and coalition forces to stay over to restore law and order seem unlikely to succeed in the time frame that Bush requires them for his re-election bid.
On the contrary what is emerging with a cruel dose of perversity is that Bush is providing the best form of defence for Saddam when he is eventually charged. A disparate society as that in Iraq is impossible to keep together except with an iron fist.
The first anniversary of the invasion of Iraq by a US led coalition was marked with extreme instability. It was one of the worst weeks, in terms of human costs, since the fall of Saddam Hussein.
President Bush is learning through bitter experience that America`s military might, effective as it is in winning wars, is much less so in keeping peace. The expectation that the majority of the Iraqis would consider the US and its allied forces as liberators and would co-operate to install some form of democracy that would remain grateful to the US for ridding it of a tyrant, is proving totally misplaced and unrealistic.
Anyone who dares to read the history of Iraq and Mesopotamia should have known that democracy and freedom are quite alien to the culture of that land. It is clear that whilst the method and cost of entry into Iraq could have been well calculated, the cost and method of exit are much less clear and have not been properly planned. Unless handled with extreme diligence both the permanence or the exit could bring incalculable strife and pain which would make Saddam`s atrocities look mild.` It would also provide very poor credentials for President Bush`s re-election bid come November.
Events are adding credibility to the claim that upon acceding to Presidency the Bush administration was obsessed with the elimination of Saddam and neglected much more serious threats which culminated in the September 11 terrorism disaster. Chief White House counter-terrorism expert Richard Clarke in his recent book `Against All Enemies` indicts the Bush administration that it not only had misplaced priorities prior to September 11th, but perhaps more seriously, it compounded such misjudgements by attempting to re-assert US dented ego by invading Iraq rather than persist in the pursuit of the true terrorists holed up in the Afghan caves.
President Bush is being forced to approach his bid for re-election with a record of misjudgements which make him unfit to occupy the most powerful post in the world. He misjudged the threat of Al Queda before September 11th (his recent defence that if he knew that terrorists were going to attack New York on that day he would have taken all precautions, is pathetic). He misjudged unproven links between Al Queda and the Saddam Hussein regime. His misjudged Iraq`s possession of weapons of mass destruction. He misjudged the timing of the invasion of Iraq which could have assembled more gradually allowing time consensus building around UN approval, and he misjudged the reaction of the Iraq people to the invading forces.
It is very doubtful whether such liability could be countered by a very rich election campaign funds chest and the fact that the American economy seems to be consolidating its growth and producing employment in good time to reach a peak by next fall.
The truth is that President Bush was planning to spearhead his re-election campaign on a tridente of solid economic performance, strong leadership in countering the terrorist threats and the successful elimination of the regime of one world`s most despicable dictators, installing instead a pro-American nascent democracy to serve as a showcase for the rest of the Middle East. Two of these three strengths are turning into political liabilities as the campaign ticks off the remaining weeks till the start of November.
The perversity of the situation in Iraq could be dawning on Bush with cruel intensity. Rather than being considered as liberators US troops in Iraq are being considered as occupiers and are being persecuted by the same people whom they liberated at very great expense. Even if withdrawal were to be possible, the fallout from an unplanned withdrawal which would leave a power vacuum to be filled by a nearly certain bloody civil war, will hardly be conducive to the image of a US pretending to use its sole super-power status with responsibility and due leadership.
Attempts to fabricate some sort of power transfer to some domestic representative body which would invite the US and coalition forces to stay over to restore law and order seem unlikely to succeed in the time frame that Bush requires them for his re-election bid.
On the contrary what is emerging with a cruel dose of perversity is that Bush is providing the best form of defence for Saddam when he is eventually charged. A disparate society as that in Iraq is impossible to keep together except with an iron fist.
No comments:
Post a Comment