WMDs camouflage real reasons behind Iraq invasion

[Texan_Til_I_Die]

Note: I may or may not agree with the author on all of his points, but it is a very interesting read...Texan

26nov04

WHY are we in Iraq? It is not, as some ranters claim, because George

Bush is stupid and bloodthirsty and John Howard a spineless crawler.

Nor is it because the US has regressed to Wilsonian imperialism.

For those seriously interested in the question I recommend a seriously

interesting new book, America's Secret War by George Friedman. Friedman

is founder of Stratfor, a private, subscription-financed global

intelligence service, which I find consistently well-informed. Friedman

writes of the struggle in Iraq in relentlessly Realpolitik terms.

Although the US believed Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass

destruction, the WMDs were ultimately "a cover for a much deeper game".

The big game began with the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan and

the US enlisting the assistance of Saudi Arabia in backing the Afghan

resistance. The Saudis provided financing and guerilla fighters. They

influenced other Islamic countries to send guerillas.

This international brigade included members of Islam's moneyed and

educated elite (including Osama bin Laden) - the core of al-Qa'ida.

When the Soviet Union retreated from Afghanistan, this elite had

become knowledgeable veterans of guerilla warfare, full of swagger

about defeating the world's second superpower.

The oil billionaires back home, impressed with themselves for "bailing

the Americans out", financed the warrior elite and the fundamentalist

Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

From this fortress headquarters, Friedman writes, al-Qa'ida ("the

Base" in English) pressed its grand design for an Islamist world

federation, a new Caliphate, which would ultimately match, if not

dominate, other superpowers. Global terrorism would be the means.

Al-Qa'ida's opening moves - attacks on American embassies and other

establishments abroad - were aimed, in Friedman's opinion, less at

damaging the US than provoking it to a reckless assault on Islam.

This, al-Qa'ida believed, would stir the "Islamic street" to a

confrontational mood with the West and rebellion against

non-fundamentalist Islamic regimes, establishing the foundations of the

great federation. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, however,

the US, confident of its hegemony, had concluded that "war was now

optional", that no power existed that could force it into war.

The passive US response to its early pinprick attacks emboldened and

frustrated al-Qa'ida. The jihadists, Friedman writes, "needed to strike

a blow that would be devastating, [breaching] the threshold between

what was tolerable and intolerable for the US". Their initiative was

the September11, 2001, attack on New York and Washington, which shocked

and disoriented the Americans. Their first reaction was to speculate

almost in panic about a September 11 with nuclear weapons.

This began an obsession with WMDs. US actions were practical and

reasonably prompt, however. The US persuaded Russia and other countries

of the former Soviet Union to make inventory of their nuclear weapons

and strengthen security on them.

Rather astonishingly, as Friedman reports it, the US pressured

Pakistan - the Muslim country most advanced in nuclear weaponry and the

one in closest contact with Islamic fundamentalism - into permitting US

soldiers dressed as civilians to place a guard on its nuclear

stockpile. To disabuse Islam of the illusion that the US was weak of

will and, on the evidence of Vietnam, unable to sustain a prolonged

war, the Bush administration decided to strike its own devastating blow

in response to September 11.

The invasion and speedy subjugation of Afghanistan staggered the

jihadists. But the US, having succeeded only in dispersing al-Qa'ida

and the Taliban, rather than eliminating them, believed it needed to

strike another heavy blow.

By then it had identified the jihadist campaign as "a Saudi problem".

Most of the September 11 suicide attackers had been Saudis. Bin Laden

was a Saudi. Saudi money trails were everywhere. An invasion of Saudi

Arabia presented the tactical problem of waging war against a country

of vast area and the strategic one of disrupting the world's oil

supplies.

The Americans had established and then strengthened a military

presence in countries surrounding Saudi Arabia - Yemen, Oman, Qatar,

Bahrain and Kuwait. Invasion of Iraq would complete the encirclement.

"From a purely military view," Friedman adds, "Iraq is the most

strategic single country in the Middle East, [bordering] six other

countries: Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Turkey and Iran."

So the US struck, with consequences unfolding nightly on our TV

screens. Friedman believes the US-jihadist war hangs in the balance.

However, the measured actions of the US during the past three years,

including its strong military presence in the Middle East, have caused

significant moderation of the position on global jihad of Saudi Arabia

and other Muslim regimes.

The strategy of the jihadists has stalled: "Not a single regime has

fallen to al-Qa'ida ... There is no rising in the Islamic street.

[There has been] complete failure of al-Qa'ida to generate the

political response they were seeking ... At this point the US is

winning ... The war goes on."

© The Australian

[Ravin R10 man]

Re: WMDs camouflage real reasons behind Iraq invasion

Whatever the reason, it still was a wake up call to the U.S. We are fighting powers of this world that seek to call evil good.

[AaronS]

Re: WMDs camouflage real reasons behind Iraq invasion

Interesting read.