-Caveat Lector-
From
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/opinion/02_06_02_d.htm
}}}>Begin
Opinion
President Bush�s daydreams and the search for an Iraqi version of
Hamid Karzai
George W. Bush appeared pleased with his new friend and ally, Hamid
Karzai, president of the Afghan interim administration. Besides
heaping praise on Karzai, Bush made him guest of honor at his recent
State of the Union address to Congress.
By inviting Karzai to such a high profile American event at a time of
war, Bush wanted to present the Afghan leader as proof of his
achievements. Here is a country that only a few short months ago was
an enemy of the United States; an outlaw nation that insisted on
offering sanctuary to America�s public enemy No. 1. Now, this nation
has become an ally whose leader not only welcomes the presence of
American troops, but also is actually pleading for more. A country
whose leader (Karzai) has been more accommodating of Bush�s requests
than Britain, refusing to oppose the US even when it continues to
bomb his own citizens. Karzai let no opportunity pass by without
thanking Bush and the American people from the bottom of his heart.
What nice feelings! If I were in Bush�s shoes, I would have wished that such a
touching scene would be repeated over and over. But who will the guest of honor be at
the State of the Union address next year?
Bush will continue to discuss this matter with his top advisers. However, the US
president undoubtedly went to bed that night with a broad smile on his face, recalling
what these advisers National Security Council Adviser
Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin
Powell told him. Bush must have said to himself: �There is nothing better than an
Iraqi Karzai. We succeeded in overthrowing the Taleban re
gime with negligible losses. We removed the powerful warlords, who helped us achieve
victory over the Soviets in another life, without our men having to fight street
battles in Kabul. We got rid not only of the Taleban an
d Al-Qaeda, but also of such warlords as Burhanuddin Rabbani and Abdelrasool Sayyaf
who didn�t agree with us 100 percent. We appointed an unknown who had no army as
leader. Why can�t we do the same in Iraq?�
These thoughts no doubt echoed through Bush�s head even as he was trying to
concentrate on the nightly sports news on the local cable station: �We can help the
Kurds in the north perhaps even the Shiite allies of the evil
Iranians to enter Baghdad and overthrow Saddam Hussein�s bloody regime. Afterward, we
can convene an Iraqi National Congress meeting somewhere in Europe, just like we did
with the Afghans in Bonn. We can persuade the Ira
qis to choose a neutral figure to lead the country. Hell, the Iraqis themselves say
that there are more Iraqi university professors, businessmen, and doctors in London
than there are in Iraq proper.�
Bush�s ideas this time aren�t all bad. It is certain that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and
the other Gulf states would be happy to see the back of Saddam Hussein and his regime.
The years that followed the 1991 Gulf War proved t
hat reconciliation with Saddam was impossible. But at the same time, it is
inconceivable that Iraq should remain ostracized from the regional order.
While it is easy to agree on the fact that Saddam Hussein and his regime must go, it
is far more difficult (and worrying) to agree on how to do it. The biggest worry, of
course, will come later: the �role� played in the r
egion by a �new democratic Iraq, in tune with American values.�
Saudi Prince Turki al-Faisal made his country�s position regarding the first part of
the Iraqi question clear. Turki told an American newspaper that Saudi Arabia wouldn�t
welcome an attack on Iraq in the next phase of Ame
rica�s war on terror if such an attack were only meant to bomb certain Iraqi targets
(as happened on so many occasions since the end of the Gulf War) while allowing the
regime to survive. If, on the other hand, the Americ
ans have a plan to replace the regime with another, then Saudi Arabia would have
another opinion.
In fact, overthrowing the Saddam Hussein regime and replacing it with a government
that would put the development of the country at the top of its list of priorities
would be good news for the region. Should that happen,
efforts for economic integration in the Middle East would receive a considerable
boost. Iraq a rich nation would be better-placed to interact with poorer Arab
countries such as Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon, which neverthele
ss enjoy substantial human resources. A process of economic development can then
commence, involving poor states such as Yemen.
Yet this is all wishful thinking. The fact of the matter is that we are Middle
Easterners living in a complex world full of suspicions and mistrust. We will continue
to look at reality in different ways. It would be very
difficult indeed to fulfill Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah�s recent call at the Gulf
Cooperation Council summit in Oman to give economic matters priority over politics.
But do dreams such as these figure in American calculations? Or is Washington only
interested in security matters a la Ariel Sharon?
In his recent speech, Bush did talk briefly of the State of the Union and of the role
his country plans to play defending freedom, justice, the rule of law, freedom of
expression, women�s rights, and private ownership. Bu
t the few positive words in Bush�s address were drowned in a sea of hostility toward
mostly Muslim lands stretching from Kashmir to Palestine. This was not missed on Arabs
and Muslims. Consequently, this year�s State of t
he Union speech lost the Americans many of the already dwindling number of friends
they have in the Arab and Muslim worlds.
Iraq is in dire need of change. Iraqis appreciate this fact more than others. I am
quite confident that the joyful scenes we witnessed in Kuwait when the US Army entered
Kuwait City will be repeated in Baghdad. Iraqis wil
l kiss the American flag out of relief that their suffering has finally come to an
end. Iraqis have had enough of hardship, death, and suffering. They are sick of
endless funerals and constant heartache, not to mention th
e humiliation all Iraqis undoubtedly feel when they hear of their countrymen drowning
in far- off seas, in their attempts to reach the safety of asylum in unwelcoming
foreign shores.
But we also realize that Iraqis are angry at the United States and perhaps more angry
at Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Baghdad has stoked up this anger, making ordinary people
believe that the Americans and the Gulf Arabs are
the cause of their plight. Yet these feelings will evaporate when the Americans arrive
as liberators, together with their Arab allies waving their fat aid checks. Most Iraqi
anger will quickly dissipate and turn into grat
itude. The rest, of course, will be vented on Saddam Hussein�s many statues,
portraits, and palaces.
Then, their anger over, Iraqis will be ready to accept any �Hamid Karzai� the
Americans choose to impose upon them, so long as he promises prosperity, justice,
equality, and democracy under a pluralist system that embrace
s a unified Iraq.
There will be problems in the details, of course, just as there were in Afghanistan.
But Afghanistan managed to overcome them, and so will Iraq. Iraq and its people
deserve a better deal than they had even before Saddam H
ussein came to power. They shouldn�t be made to wait longer just to assuage the fears
and worries of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey.
All these countries and others have legitimate interests in seeing stability in Iraq,
but these interests can be seen as joint interests with Iraq as well. Change in Iraq
can have positive economic and political benefits
for all the countries of the region.
The process of change in Iraq will be one long, exciting party. Thousands of exiles
will return home looking for a place and a role to play in their homeland. Iraq�s
neighbors will offer help, especially after they reassu
re themselves that the new Iraq will not become an American means to pressure
neighboring states. Iraq will need years to lick its wounds and build up trust between
its own people. That is why it will not interfere in the
affairs of its neighbors who should not interfere in its affairs, unless to offer
help.
If this proves to be the case, then the party will continue happily unless it is
attended by unwanted Israeli gatecrashers who will contrive to gain entry under the
pretext of their being neighbors with interests as well.
In this case, the party will be over, and the troubles will begin once again.
Jamal Ahmad Khashoggi is a Saudi political analyst and deputy editor-in-chief of Saudi
Arabia�s English-language Arab News
Your feedback is important to us!
We invite all our readers to share with us their views and comments
about this article.
Please type in your comment below and press 'submit'
Copyright� 2001 The Daily Star. All rights reserved.
End<{{{
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe
simply because it has been handed down for many generations. Do not
believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do
not believe in anything simply because it is written in Holy Scriptures. Do not
believe in anything merely on the authority of Teachers, elders or wise men.
Believe only after careful observation and analysis, when you find that it
agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all.
Then accept it and live up to it."
The Buddha on Belief, from the Kalama Sutta
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
