| |
US will delay attack on Iraq at its
peril
By Syed Saleem Shahzad
KARACHI - The longer that Washington delays in
attacking Iraq, the greater are the chances of a new
military, strategic and economic alliance being formed
in the Middle East and the Gulf to counter US designs in
the region.
Preparations for such an alliance
have been under way for some time, at the instigation
mainly of Saudi Arabia and Iran, but the initiative is
gaining pace as US President George W Bush still appears
bent on staging a "regime change" in Baghdad to oust
Saddam Hussein.
On Wednesday, Bush once again
asserted that ousting Saddam "is in the interests of the
world", but he indicated that the United States was in
no hurry. "I'm a patient man," Bush said on his Texas
ranch.
Ever since the US-led attack on
Afghanistan, the Arab world has become increasingly
concerned about US plans in the region. These fears were
further fueled by Washington lumping Iran and Iraq into
a so-called axis of evil, along with North Korea, and
the view is now that Washington will attempt to install
a pro-American government in Iraq and establish a strong
base in the country from which a new order in the Middle
East will be established to ensure the implementation of
the American vision of peace.
To counter this,
backroom maneuvering has intensified to try to draw
together those opposed to the US into an effective
grouping. It is envisaged that once this social contract
is cemented, a clear divide would emerge between the
Arab world and the US. And unlike the initially muted
response to the attacks on Afghanistan, the US and
expect a far more vociferous, and even physical, reply
to moves against Iraq, especially the longer it delays.
An indiction of this mood is reflected by Saudi
investors, who are reported to have withdrawn billions
of dollars from the US as relations between the two
countries steadily deteriorate. The Financial Times
reported this week that Saudi investors had withdrawn
between $100-$200 billion for fear that these assets
might be seized following a lawsuit linked to the
September 11 attacks. More than 700 relatives of
September 11 victims are claiming against seven Saudi
bankers, Islamic charities and individuals, accusing
them of funding terrorism and seeking damages of around
$1 trillion.
An estimated $1.3 trillion of
Middle East wealth was invested abroad last year, of
which about $750 billion was Saudi private investments.
Of this, 60 percent, or $450 billion, was invested in US
markets, bankers estimate. European and Asian markets
received 30 percent and 10 percent of the total
respectively. Bankers believe that the latest
withdrawals are the climax of a trend that began soon
after September 11, with many big Saudi businessmen
diverting their capital from the US to the Middle East
and Gulf regions.
Another example of the
changing mood in the Arab world is Zamzam Cola, an
Iranian soft drink named after a holy spring in Mecca
which has won an enthusiastic reception in Saudi Arabia.
Zamzam Cola is now seen as an alternative to Coca-Cola
and Pepsi, and has gone on sale in the region as an Arab
boycott of American goods gathers momentum. US exports
to Saudi Arabia declined by more than 40 percent in the
first three months of 2002. Preparations are under way
to establish a bottling factory for Zamzam Cola in
neighboring Bahrain, where the drink has also proved
very popular.
Meanwhile, Asia Times Online spoke
to the Iraqi ambassador in Islamabad, Dr Kazim Abdul
Hameed Al-Rawi, who is considered very close to Saddam
Hussein. The envoy is of the strong opinion that the US
has long had designs on Iraq, which is why it has kept
up pressure on the country, even after the ceasefire
following the Gulf War of 1991.
"There is a
misconception that the US wanted to attack Iraq to grab
its oil installations. This is not the ultimate aim. The
ultimate aim is to serve Zionist designs in the region,"
Al-Rawi says. "In 1991 there was some reason for the US
attack [Iraq's occupation of Kuwait], but this time
there is no reason at all and it appears that the US
want to set its foot here to control the region.
"The neighboring countries are also cognizant of
US designs. As a result, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia have
refused to support US attacks. Iran is very much with
us. As far as Jordan is concerned, it is just propaganda
of the Western press that Jordan will provide bases to
the US. We have diplomatically been in touch with Jordan
and it is just out of the question that Jordan would
support a US attack on Iraq."
In 1991 Pakistani
masses took to the streets in favor of Iraq, and army
chief General Mirza Aslam Beg was opposed to sending
troops to aid the US, although a decision was taken very
late to send them to Saudi Arabia only. Today, Islamabad
is a frontline state and an ally of the US in its war on
terror, so it can be expected to support Washington.
Similarly, Egypt made a fortune in aid and grants
following its support of the US in 1991, and it could be
expected to do the same again should Iraq be attacked.
Not so, says Al-Rawi. "Believe me, the ground
facts are changed. Pakistan and Egypt would not behave
like they did in the past. Their precise reactions will
be determined only by time."
The ambassador also
scoffs at suggestions that Iraq's political system,
which is 30 years old, will be as easily replaced as
some in Washington seem to believe, pointing out that it
has survived many intrigues in the past, and it will
continue to do so.
"These [Iraqi] opposition
groups claim that they will topple the government, yet
the majority of them have never even visited Iraq. In
fact, many of them cannot even speak Arabic or any other
local dialect. They are all pampered by the United
Kingdom and the US, yet they still number no more than
70," said Al-Rawi.
(©2002 Asia Times Online Co
Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact content@atimes.com
for information on our sales and syndication
policies.)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
