| |
The US problem with solving
problems
By Erich Marquardt
Recent comments made by US Deputy Defense
Secretary Paul Wolfowitz further articulate the Bush
administration's less prominent reasons for removing
from power the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. Wolfowitz
told the US magazine Vanity Fair that the threat and/or
existence of weapons of mass destruction was not the
only reason for the US-led attack, and that what was
presented and believed by many to be the primary
justification for the war - weapons of mass destruction
- was merely a "bureaucratic reason" that "everyone
could agree on". The deputy secretary's words come at an
already contentious time, fueled by the continued
failure of the United States government to find Iraq's
alleged weapons of mass destruction.
Instead,
Wolfowitz, commonly seen as one of the main architects
of current Bush administration policy, explained that a
"huge" reason for the war was the need to remove US
troops from Saudi Arabia. Wolfowitz said, "Just lifting
that burden from the Saudis is itself going to open the
door to a more peaceful Middle East." After the Gulf War
in 1991, the administration of former president George H
W Bush kept a large contingent of US troops in Saudi
Arabia, ostensibly to patrol the two "no fly zones"
established by the US in southern and northern Iraq. The
zones provided Washington with the permanent opportunity
to bomb targets of choice in Iraq, in addition to
keeping the Saddam Hussein regime weak in case a future
invasion became necessary. However, US troops in Saudi
Arabia helped lead to what US intelligence agencies term
as "blowback" - when US policies cause unexpected damage
to US interests.
The September 11 attacks were
the unanticipated side-effects of US policies abroad -
supporting the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the
Soviet Union, stationing US troops in Saudi Arabia and
other Muslim-majority countries, providing aid to Middle
Eastern despots who suppress domestic dissent, and
manipulating political developments in Middle Eastern
states, either through outright military intervention or
covertly. Due to these policies, the citizens of
Muslim-majority countries found much of their societal
anguish caused by the policies emanating from the White
House. This anguish helped give rise to militant Islamic
groups that found the US to be the source of their
discontent and hatred. When this hatred culminated in
the September 11 attacks, the Bush administration was
forced to reassess US foreign policy objectives. Its
reaction was to increase US influence around the world,
especially in countries with strong Islamic sympathies.
By removing Saddam and the Ba'athist
infrastructure, the Bush administration was able to
quickly remove a government that - to its advantage -
posed little military threat to the US invading forces
and also was led by a fascist dictator that much of the
world despised; in return, the US was afforded the
option of using Iraq as a new staging ground for the war
on militant Islam. Now that Saddam has been removed, the
Bush administration has been able to withdraw troops
from Saudi Arabia, thus giving the US more diplomatic
leverage with the Saudi leadership. Through this
leverage, Washington can now press Riyadh to brutally
crack down on Islamic militant groups and their
sympathizers within Saudi society.
Fifteen of
the 19 hijackers involved in the September 11 attacks
were Saudi nationals, a fact that more than hints at the
vitriolic attitude that much of Saudi society has toward
US policies in the Middle East. Moreover, Saudi Arabia
has supported Palestinian militant groups in their fight
against the Israelis, the latter a consistent US ally
that currently has unusual clout in the US government
due to the composition of the Bush administration.
Saudi Arabia also came under attack last summer
by an analyst with the Rand Corporation who was invited
by Richard Perle to address the Pentagon Defense
Advisory Board. Laurent Murawiec told the group that
Saudi Arabia is a country whose contributions and
support are vital to the existence of terrorism.
Murawiec also said, "There is an 'Arabia', but it needs
not be 'Saudi'."
Combined with the statements by
Wolfowitz and other members of the Bush administration,
it is clear that Washington has a significant interest
in increasing its influence in the Middle East in an
attempt to eliminate groups that are willing to use
violence to damage US interests at home and abroad. It
is no longer seen as a region where developments can
take their time; the US plans on preemptively dealing
with various issues immediately.
In addition to
Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran have been two of a few
chosen countries to receive serious scrutiny by the Bush
administration. The governments of both countries have
been critical of US foreign policy, much to the approval
of their citizenry. But now with US military forces in
both Iraq and Afghanistan, the US finds itself able to
easily strike both countries. Because of this,
Washington was able to use the invasion of Iraq to
increase its influence over both Syria and Iran, in
addition to other Middle Eastern states.
Therefore, as long as the US is able to retain
control of Iraq, and mend ties with former allies,
Washington will find itself in a better position to
politically and physically eliminate militant Islamic
groups or governments that threaten US interests. The
main vulnerability of this strategy is that it will
increase accessibility to US targets for these groups.
The US could also possibly be helping its enemies
recruit new members willing to attack the US and its
interests due to Washington's increased presence in the
affairs of Middle Eastern societies. Already,
anti-American attitudes throughout the world, and
especially in the Middle East, have increased since the
election of the Bush administration - and even more so
since the invasion of Iraq. This vulnerability could
work to quickly intensify the very feelings that the US
is trying to destroy.
Published with
permission of the Power and
Interest News Report, an analysis-based
publication that seeks to provide insight into various
conflicts, regions and points of interest around the
globe. All comments should be directed to content@pinr.com
|
| |
|
|
 |
|
