-Caveat Lector-

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200208/19/eng20020819_101723.shtml

Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Tuesday, August 20, 2002

Why US Is Dead Set on Toppling Saddam Hussein

There are several countries the United States has labeled as "axis of
evils", and there is no small number of countries branded as "war-like"
simply because they keep on talking about opposition to the United States,
and there are even more countries regarded as dictatorial countries by
Washington, then, why does Washington sets its mind on getting rid of
President Saddam?

For a while, there have been frequent reports on the US plan to use force
against Iraq and topple the Saddam Hussein regime; it is reported that the
time for using force is drawing nearer and nearer, there is even guess
simply impossible to be known by outsiders that concrete action will be
taken on November 6. In fact, a careful analysis reveals that US use of
force against Iraq seems still involving many uncertain factors.

It is remembered that President George W. Bush said not long ago that if
force is to be used against Iraq, it is simply impossible to disclose in
advance as regards what method will be employed and when action will be
taken. He will not let US media know, still less will he tell Iraq about all
these. If one recalls related things, one will find that it seems the US
President pays particular attention to wording, he only mentioned a variety
of means for choice to reach his aim of changing the Iraqi regime, and it
seems he does not insist on achieving his aim through war.

There are several countries the United States has labeled as "axis of
evils", and there is no small number of countries branded as "war-like"
simply because they keep on talking about opposition to the United States,
and there are even more countries regarded as dictatorial countries by
Washington, then, why does Washington sets its mind on getting rid of
President Saddam?

According to a world opinion analysis, the most possible reason for a direct
war to be broken out again between the United States and Iraq is that
Baghdad refuses to allow UN weaponry examiners to return to Iraq for
examination. Because in the four years after their withdrawal from Iraq, it
is entirely possible for Baghdad to re-establish its endeavor to resume the
manufacture of large-scale weapons of mass destruction. The United States
firmly believes that Iraq has developed many weapons during this period, at
least it has intensified its biochemical weapons, and is possible that it
has even reached the stage of getting close to the manufacture of nuclear
weapons. Washington affirms that due to reasons such as whether UN weapon
examiners are allowed to return to Iraq and even Baghdad agrees to the
examination, the process of which would be full of twists and turns, and
finally it would be hard to have notable results in the examination
therefore, the Saddam regime has constituted threats to its neighbors and
the world at large, except for topping it, it is impossible to obstruct its
determination to develop nuclear weapons. Therefore, it can be said that
presently US attitude toward Iraq is far from being a question of resuming
weapon examination in accordance with the resolution of the UN Security
Council, but rather it is purely American intention to throw out President
Saddam.

It is not a rare phenomenon that in international affairs, the United States
groundlessly guesses, doubts and even makes similar charges and intimidation
against other countries, nor is it rare that it makes mistakes due to the
intelligence it relies on. Nevertheless, this time the United States takes a
firm hold of Iraq and is determined to overthrow the Saddam regime as if it
had got a handle against Iraq. One year after the "desert fox" military
action, the UN Security Council passed the 1284 Resolution on December 17,
1999, under which the UN can unconditionally check any suspicious place
within Iraq. It is exactly with this "imperial sword" that Washington has
become so "overbearing", UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan can only "act
according to rules", and Iraq cannot but "make concession to save the
situation".

An analysis says Baghdad is hesitating and in a dilemma over the question as
to whether or not allowing the UN weapon examiners to return to Iraq, one of
the reasons for this is: If it allows examination, perhaps it will never be
possible for Baghdad to make the United States and others satisfied; but if
it refuses, it would be hardly possible to rid itself of the international
sanctions against it. Although Iraq has been working hard in recent years to
improve its relations with Arab countries and has gained extraordinary
achievements in the Arab Union, to this date it still pays a price for the
"slip" it made in those years, it may well be said that that has caused it
endless troubles.

On August 12 Iraq seemed to close the door to weapon examiners-a government
minister, while being covered by the Qatar Peninsula TV Station, indicated
that it was already unnecessary for UN weapon examiners to return to Iraq,
because this work had been over four years ago. Later, report said that on
the evening of August 15 the United Nations again received a signed letter
from Iraqi foreign minister to Secretary-General Kofi Annan as a reply to
the latter's August 5 letter, indicating that Iraq was willing to discuss
with the UN again question on allowing UN weapon examiners to return to
Baghdad. Sources say that this time Baghdad actually has little new idea, it
is only bargaining with the United Nations, so it can hardly gain Kofi
Annan's identification. This seems to indicate that while making every
preparation, Iraq is trying hard to avoid military attacks from the United
States.

With regard to military attacks to be possibly launched by the United States
against Iraq, it is really only an individual case that countries such as
Israel which hope the United States to make a prompt decision and think the
earlier attacks are launched the better. Among the EU countries, it seems
only a few such as Britain which would finally follow up if Washington
really dispatches troops. In the United States, even within the Republican
Party, there are divergent views: For instance, Brent Scowcroft, the
national security advisor to old George Bush recently said in his article
published in Wall Street Daily that attacking Iraq out of the consideration
of America's narrow interests instead of solving the most urgent
Palestine-Israel question in the Middle East makes it likely to trigger a
war, thus thoroughly destroying the US hard-formed global anti-terrorism
alliance. In which Israel may get involved and may use nuclear weapons after
being attacked by Iraqi missiles, and it would thus be most dangerous for a
war to break out in the Middle East region.

Nevertheless, it must be noticed that there are obviously different reasons
for the current vehement opposition by the international community to
America's planned military attacks on Iraq. Some countries and personages
also do not favor the Saddam regime and even think it better to replace it,
only they are worried that once a fight is started, its process and
consequence would run contrary to one's wishes and it would get out of
control. Even within the Arab world, it is hard to say that their motives
are entirely the same in their opposition to the use of force against Iraq.

Judged from US recent invitation to leaders of six major Iraqi opposition
organizations and related personages to Washington to meet with US officials
and their discussions on questions concerning the establishment of
"post-Saddam age" "democratic" politics and US aid and financial support to
these leaders and personages, although Bush had made up his mind to "topple
Saddam", it seems that he has not chosen concrete method to achieve this
purpose. Furthermore, even if the United States resorts to force, it is
still hard to determine the scale of the fight. Because if America's real
aim is just to overthrow the Saddam regime, then just as it did to the
former Panama Noriega regime in those years, it needs only to launch
tactical attack. In this way, it would meet with much less opposition and
incur much fewer damages to itself. It is reported that President Bush, now
on a vacation, recently indicated on the vicinity of Texas Farm that he was
concerned about people's debate on a possible fight against Iraq and he
would make a decision on the basis of the latest intelligence and the
protection of US interests. He reiterated that currently he had not decided
how and when he would "go into action" and that before he made the final
decision, he would solicit the opinions of US Congress, allies, friends and
leaders of some countries around the world.

It appears that there is still opportunity for the international community
to stop the United States from launching a fight against Iraq; and there is
still hope for Iraq to flexibly adjust its diplomatic tactics in order to
avoid taking a beating.

The above report, written by Xu Ping, People Online correspondent stationed
in Egypt, was dispatched from Cairo on August 18.

<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

Reply via email to