Strong words to Bush and Blair in today's Times from Sir Andrew Green, UK
Ambassador to Syria 1991-4, Ambassador to Saudi Arabia 1996-2000.

<<<<
Consequences of a war with Iraq

"Everything points to war with Iraq" (headline, September 4). So we are now
on course for a foreign policy disaster in the Middle East unmatched since
the Suez debacle 0f 1956.

The Primie Minister's forthcoming dossierr is irrelevant. Nobody doubts
that Iraq possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iran, Syria and Israel
also possess them. The issue is whether any of these countries will use
them against the West. There is no reason to suppose that Saddam will do
so. when his back was against the wall he used them against Kurds and
Iranians who could not retaliate.  The much more relevant point is that he
did not use them against coalition forces in 1991. In short, deterrence
worked then and will work again. However, attcking Iraq could generate a
situation of last-resort and a desire for revenge in which he might well
contemplate their use.

And what would we do after an attack on Baghdad? Occupy Iraq? American talk
of a benevolent successor regime is highly superficial. The external
opposition are divided and despised by the Iraqi people as puppets of the
CIA. They are no basis for a future government. Far more likely is another
Shia uprising that will lead to a bloodbath, followed by a civil war in
which neighbouring states are bound to interfere. Not only would Iranian
influence in the region grow substantially but stability in the Gulf -- the
central aim of our policy -- would be destroyed for years to come.

Meanwhile, there would be outrage throughout the Arab world -- greatly
intensified if the Israelis, as they now threaten, were to get involved.
Ifd britain participated, we would set ourelves on a collision course with
the Arab and much of the Muslim world at a time when the divide between
Islam and the West is the most dangerous element in world affairs. By
deepening that divide we would play into the hands of the Al Qaeda, whose
main objective this is.

All major decisions entail balancing risks. A continued policy towards
Saddam of containment and deterrence certainly carries risks but they are,
I suggest, a great deal less than those of putting a match to the Arab and
Muslim world. The Prime Minister seems determined to carry on. Let us hope
that his party can restrain him.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------

Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
Tel: +44 1225 312622;  Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to