| |
Another regime change in
Iraq
By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON -
The war between the Pentagon and the State Department
appears to be raging as furiously as ever with reports
that the latter may have mounted something of a coup
d'etat against the neo-conservative hawks around
Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld by having former diplomat
L Paul Bremer as Washington's new viceroy in Baghdad.
But, as in almost everything involving Iraq - or
the Mideast road map or North Korea - these days, no one
can say with certainty who is really up and who is
really down at the moment.
With President George
W Bush determined to show the electorate that he is now
focused on the troubled economy rather than on planning
for yet another war, US intentions in Iraq remain
unclear.
In recent days, for example, a number
of different and, to some extent mutually exclusive,
plans about what Washington wants to do with Iraq's oil
industry have surfaced in the press.
One group
of advisers closely tied to the Pentagon is calling for
rapid privatization; another closer to the State
Department favors a far more conservative approach;
while a third and more eclectic group wants Washington
to replicate a system used in Alaska, whereby each
citizen receives a share in cash of the industry's
yearly profits.
Or take the question of how
quickly to set up an Iraqi governing authority and who
should run it. Until last week, the State Department and
the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had argued in
favor of waiting at least several months to give some
time for internal leaders to emerge, rather than to go
with a Pentagon plan to quickly set up a "transitional
government" as long called for by its favorite exile
group, the Iraqi National Congress (INC) led by Ahmed
Chalabi.
The New York Times has reported that
the Pentagon has gained the upper hand in the struggle
largely due to increasing concerns about Iranian
influence over the majority Shi'ite population, as well
as growing anti-Americanism among Sunnis.
To
deflect both trends, policymakers reportedly concluded
that putting an Iraqi face - even if that of Chalabi,
who has not lived in the country for more than 40 years
- on the occupation had become far more urgent.
But State Department officials insisted no
decisions have been made. And they also noted with
ill-disguised glee that even Chalabi's Pentagon patrons
were being forced to admit that their hero appeared to
have less of a following in Iraq than they had been led
to believe.
Moreover, US Central Command
(Centcom) has become increasingly unhappy with the INC
and its militia, the so-called Free Iraqi Forces, which
have reportedly set up roadblocks and looted buildings
and villas without US authorization. Some even got into
a firefight with US forces on Sunday night.
It
is in this context that Bremer's anticipated
appointment, which has yet to be formally announced, has
reshuffled the board once again.
Rumsfeld had
handpicked retired general Jay Garner to oversee the
occupation and report to Centcom commander, General
Tommy Franks. Garner, who spent the early part of the
war in Kuwait, has been in Baghdad for more than a week.
The defense secretary had also selected his own chief of
staff, Lawrence di Rita - whose wife is on the staff of
the pro-INC Committee for the Liberation of Iraq - to
also play a prominent role, as he did in a meeting of
300 Iraqi leaders convened by Garner in Baghdad this
week.
But it now appears that Garner will report
to Bremer, who may report directly to the White House
without even going through Franks.
Leak of his
appointment clearly embarrassed Rumsfeld, whose press
office emailed a rare statement by the secretary
asserting, "Jay Garner is doing a truly outstanding job
for the nation. Any suggestion to the contrary is flatly
untrue and mischievous. The White House has made no
announcement regarding other appointments."
In
testimony before Congress last week, Powell, still
smarting from a slashing attack last week by Rumsfeld
confidante and former Speaker of the House of
Representatives Newt Gingrich, had hinted at the
appointment without mentioning either the position or
Bremer's name.
State Department officials said
the move signaled a victory for Powell, who, with strong
support from British Prime Minister Tony Blair and
senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, had argued that the United Nations,
independent relief and humanitarian groups and even
allied nations would be far less inclined to help with
peacekeeping and reconstruction if they had to report to
a general, even if he was retired from military service.
At the same time, Bremer is no dove. The State
Department's counter-terrorism chief during the
administration of former President Ronald Reagan and
chairman of the National Commission on Terrorism which
concluded its work in 2000, Bremer worked for Kissinger
Associates after he left the foreign service. While his
views are generally quite conservative, he also is seen
as a consummate realist who lacks the kind of missionary
spirit for democracy that aides around Rumsfeld and Vice
President Dick Cheney espouse.
Like the
neo-conservatives, he has long called for a very hard
line against what he calls "extremist Islam" and for
aggressive tactics, including assassination, in pursuing
and preempting suspected terrorists.
In a 1996
Wall Street Journal article, he called on then-president
Bill Clinton to deliver ultimatums to Libya, Syria, Iran
and Sudan to cease any support for terrorism or face
military action. His rhetoric in that regard has been
distinctly "Rumsfeldian".
But Bremer has also
voiced great skepticism about exporting democracy,
particularly to what he calls "ethnically aroused" parts
of the world, such as the Middle East, a view which puts
him very much at odds with the neo-conservatives.
Despite his strong sentiments on fighting
"extremist Islam", Bremer's consensus-building skills,
which were sorely tested in both the Reagan
administration and the Terrorism Commission, are highly
regarded. Between the Pentagon and the State Department,
they will be badly needed.
(Inter Press Service)
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
