A rchive Date
[ 11-09-2002 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ U.S ]
|
[http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/goldstein_sep10.html
S'damn nuts
The Iraqis aren't America's only enemies in the Mideast
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN -- Toronto Sun
September 10, 2002
George Bush's plans to attack Iraq would be far more credible if he would tell us at the same time what he plans to do about Saudi Arabia.
Fifteen of the 19 terrorists who hijacked those four planes and flew them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field near Pittsburgh (thanks to its courageous passengers) a year ago were well-to-do Saudis.
So was, or is, Osama bin Laden.
We're constantly told by apologists for the awful Saudi regime that the terrorists are enemies of the ruling royal House of Saud, too. But given that the Saudis are notorious for funding Islamic extremism and global terrorism as long as its practitioners leave Saudi Arabia out of the "global" equation, it's hardly a convincing argument.
It would be far easier to understand Bush going after the Saudis (maybe not an invasion, but at least economic sanctions) as a part of his war on terror, than even Iraq and Saddam Hussein, because the links to what happened last Sept. 11 are so much more readily apparent.
Instead, American troops remain in Saudi Arabia to protect it from an invasion by Saddam while bin Laden, dead or alive, uses the American "occupation" of Saudi Arabia to justify his terrorism, along with hating Israel. Mideast madness.
And yet Saudi Arabia remains America's trusted ally, and thus, presumably ours, in the war against terror, which makes about as much sense as having a rogue state like Syria sitting on the United Nations Security Council.
Indeed, Bush's support for the Saudi regime - including visits by its senior ministers and princes to the White House - is one reason he's having trouble convincing people in other countries about the importance of the war against Iraq.
Certainly, the world would be well rid of Saddam Hussein - and more power to the Americans if they can kill him and replace his awful regime with something better.
But as long as countries like Saudi Arabia are coddled by the Americans, it just makes people suspicious George W. is simply trying to finish off Saddam in order to avenge his father, who didn't do the job as American president back when he had the chance in 1991, following the Gulf war.
At least Bush is right about pushing for action against Iraq, with or without the sanction of the United Nations including the so-called "moderate" Arab states. While it's true much of the Arab world fears and loathes Saddam, with reason, the problem is they fear and loathe Israel even more.
Thus, any UN-sanctioned effort to depose Saddam will end up being so watered down and qualified for fear of offending the Arab states it will be doomed to fail.
The Americans wouldn't be facing this problem now if they had taken out Saddam when they had the chance but they abandoned that in 1991 for fear of upsetting the Arab countries who were then a part of the coalition against Iraq following its invasion of Kuwait.
Worse, then U.S. president George Bush urged rebel Kurds and Shia Muslims at the time to rise up and overthrow Saddam - and when they took him seriously and did, offered them no help. That allowed the battered remains of Saddam's army to finish them off and further cement his power.
What's followed has been more than a decade of misery for the Iraqi people, still in Saddam's grip, while he still defies UN resolutions about weapons inspectors, no-fly zones, etc. It's hard to see how the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians from hunger and disease - the result of continuing economic sanctions against Iraq resulting from the Gulf war - has hurt Saddam, or achieved anything other than helping this terrible dictator convince his people, who are clearly incapable of overthrowing him, that America is the Great Satan.
At least Bush's apparent readiness to attack Iraq unilaterally if he can't get UN approval makes sense.
It's easy for Jean Chretien and the perpetually timid European leaders to make motherhood statements about wanting "proof" Saddam is a threat to world peace - as if more proof is needed - while demanding the UN sanction an invasion. Problem is, if the UN sanctions an invasion, it won't work because it will be so qualified.
None of which explains why the Bush administration hasn't gone after Saudi Arabia in the wake of Sept. 11.
Other than its need for Saudi oil, that is.
Lorrie can be reached at (416) 947-2212, by fax at (416) 947-3228 or by e-mail at lorrie.goldstein@tor.sunpub.com Or visit his home page Letters to the editor should be sent to editor@sunpub.com
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|