A rchive Date
[ 13-11-2002 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Iraq ]
|
[http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/worthington.html
Let the games begin in Iraq
By PETER WORTHINGTON - Toronto Sun
November 13, 2002
Now that the Iraqi parliament has unanimously rejected the UN "ultimatum" for weapons inspectors to return, it remains only for Saddam Hussein to make the final decision for the war to start.
Saddam's is the only voice that matters (they sure like unanimous votes in Iraq!), so unless he does the unexpected (again) it looks as if U.S. President Bush will have the UN's approval to take the wily tyrant out.
Friday is the day of decision, but some find it odd that the Iraqi parliament voted as it did. It's likely a face-saving gimmick. If Saddam now accepts the UN terms, he can present himself as a man of peace, while if he rejects them, he's following the will of parliament. Either way, he can't lose - or so he thinks.
Perhaps facetiously, there are those who urge that if Bush is determined to be rid of Saddam, but can never be sure of where he is at any given moment, he should have launched an air strike against the parliament where Saddam was holding court, and in one blast be rid of Saddam and his faithful echoes.
We're told Saddam has numerous doubles and look-alikes wandering around, so assassins can never be sure of nailing the guy.
Still, the meaningless parliamentary vote in Iraq brings the likelihood of war that much closer, unless there's a coup, which is unlikely.
Slowly but steadily and with all sorts of rationalizing - like pretending they're following the UN Security Council lead - the world is now reconciled to the U.S. view that Saddam has to go. The idea of house-to-house fighting in Baghdad is mere fantasy.
Iraq will collapse quickly. Why now, one might ask, when it's been obvious and provable for years that Saddam is a tyrant of epic and ruthless proportions?
Yes, terrorism was the catalyst, and a legitimate reason to purge erratic, rogue regimes that threaten the world with weapons of instability and menace, especially chemo-biological weapons. But oil is also a key factor.
Eliminating international terrorism means going after Saudi Arabia, the financier of much terror. But Saudi Arabia also controls the world's oil resources and poses as America's friend - which is nonsense, because the Saudis like only themselves. By knocking off Saddam, Iraq's enormous oil reserves will fall into Anglo-American hands - as used to be the case before being nationalized 30-plus years ago.
With the U.S. and Britain controlling Iraq's oil, the price would come down which would please every developed country. Perhaps more important it would give the U.S. leverage over Saudi Arabia.
Right now, the Saudis control the world price of oil. If America could break its dependency on the Saudis, it would make it easier to go after the source of terrorist money. Without financing, militant Islamic terrorism is curtailed, and becomes a regional rather than international issue.
Looked at this way, the real target of America's war against terrorism on the Middle Eastern front may not be Saddam at all but the Saudi royal family, which is under siege these days by the militant Islam which uses, but despises the Saudis.
These are interesting times. Without anyone really admitting it, perhaps the world is being realigned to suit those countries that have real power and clout, and not just votes in the UN.
Key in this scenario is Russia, which also has oil, but the Russians and Americans have broader interests that coincide. They are potential allies in the new "great game" of controlling the world.
The Russians are not encumbered with moral niceties as the Americans are, but which have been dulled since Sept. 11. Right now is the pause before the game begins.
Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@sunpub.com
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|