America Sinking in The
Quicksand of Iraq
Dr. Marwan Asmar
Gulf News
27 September, 2003Washington accuses 'regional terrorists' or Baathists for the attack on Iraqi Governing Council member Akila Al Hashimi," says Zuhair Quseibati in Al Hayat (UK). But he goes on to say that the Americans are "failing to provide security and stability in Iraq, and that their soldiers are dying by the day and US authorities are looking for ways to get them out of the dilemma they have got themselves into".
He adds: "The meeting this week of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Shroeder in Berlin is part of an American attempt to get European and international backing for their presence in Iraq.
"The summit was not to 'solidify' a European voice but save the flagging popularity of George W. Bush. But Chirac and Shroeder firmly believe the American occupation of Iraq should not be given international legitimacy at the Security Council," Quseibati says.
"They maintain, other than the creation of an Iraqi Governing Council, which itself does not have legitimacy, the occupation of Iraq failed to achieve anything besides creating divisions based on sectarian lines in the country.
"They would give backing for a UN role only if the US agrees for a time-period to end their occupation. While Chirac and Shroeder may want to contain the rift with the Americans, they are unwilling to link the security issue in Iraq with the question of terrorism, something which the Bush administration seem to be keen on doing."
But besides this, the columnists adds that Bush is looking at the long-term objective of winning the forthcoming American elections.
"The Democrats may have a good chance this time, opening a large front against Bush and the Republicans in the light of the deteriorating situation in Iraq," the writer points out.
"British Prime Minister Tony Blair recognises that there must be a UN role in Iraq, but he does not say what this should be," says Al Sharq (Qatar) in its editorial.
"His visit to Berlin points to the need for US backing at the United Nations. The support of these two countries is essential for the resolution adopted by America that will allow the distribution of the military and economic burden of Iraq from the US and Britain to the world community. However, his visit does not appear to bridge the political differences over Iraq."
The daily says that there are now "understandings" between the three European leaders on the need to transfer sovereignty to Iraqis quickly through an elected democratic government, in addition to giving the UN a principle role.
"But France and Germany do not see in the present American resolution a guarantee for the transfer of authority according to a specific timetable."
Ahmed Omrabi in Al Bayan (UAE) says the Bush administration will enter American and world history through their "doctrine of pre-emption" used in Afghanistan and Iraq. "However the failure of this doctrine is likely to be higher than its success. Since its war on Iraq and Afghanistan - now more than two years ago - the United States has failed on diplomatic and military levels.
"While in Afghanistan, it installed a new government, the situation there is shaky, and the Talibans are still a force to be reckoned with in the country."
The columnist says the same is true for Al Qaida with Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al Thawahari still at large on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.
"As for the American presence in Iraq, US soldiers are also having a hard time," Omrabi adds. "The resistance to occupation has forced the Americans to take on a defensive strategy because of the daily attacks against them. Indeed, the nature of the resistance is turning out to be militaristic and bloody.
"America received wide international support for its war in Afghanistan. But this support came in the light of the September 11 attacks on Washington and New York and the subsequent 'hysteria' for fighting global terrorism.
"By the time the US started its campaign on Iraq under the pretext of fighting terrorism and wanting to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction, the global environment had changed with stiff resistance against a war on Baghdad, especially from America's European allies. Consequently Washington has become internationally isolated but this didn't stop it waging war on Iraq. Clearly the doctrine of pre-emption has failed."
The writer goes on to ask: "Who's next?"
"Will the failure of the doctrine of pre-emption stop the American administration from launching other wars in the future?"
Omrabi believes that this is related to how much the Pentagon continues to influence the US government, "while pressures are imposed from outside in the interest of big business".