Iraq War-Defiance to Capitulation

Dr. S. M. Rahman

            9/11 tragedy triggered utilitarian propensity on the part of USA to restructure the global order from the realm of aspiration to find expression into reality. Realism and idealism have not always been on speaking terms. Immanuel Kant’s ‘categorical imperative’ laid down ethics of action as a moral commitment, independent of ‘ends’. Bentham, postulated utilitarianism as the final determinant of action. One could say, the choice was between Kant and Machivelli. USA opted in favour of the latter. This in essence, shapes the global crisis - nihilistic assertion of unilateralism as a neo-imperialistic paradigm. Bipolar world was not an utopian order, but it served as a functional imperative to maintain respectable balance and keep absolute hegemonism at bay. Unbridled power and soulless globalization that flowed sequel to the demise of bipolarity, have robbed the world of the sublime values - the decency and propriety that glorify civilization. Eric Kahler in his profound book, The Tower and the Abyss, prophetically portrays what we have landed into: “The most frightening aspect of our present world is not the horrors in themselves, the atrocities, the technological exterminations, but the one fact at the very root of it all: the fading away of any human criterion, the disruption of the contents and substrata of human responsibility”. USA has dehumanized unipolarity by acting irresponsibly in waging two successive wars, within a span of two years - war in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003, both for the same objective to lend extension to its primacy in the most atrocious manner - barbarization of violence in the name of so called “pre-emptive war”. The moral imperative of war is the most fatal casualty. None of these fall in the Saint Augustine’s category of ‘justifiable wars’.

            Bismarck, had laid down a very fine standard: “whoever wants to start a war, better think of reason which will be accepted after the war.” The “coalition of the willing” may go through a short term euphoria of so called ‘victory’, but the fall-out of the guilt would be colossal and hard to dispense with. It is a mega defeat. It may manifest in many self-defeating and aberrant geopolitical acts, ultimately losing what is intended to preserve - ‘Unipolarity”, or revival of Roman Glory. Lincoln’s famous proclamation: “You cant fool all the people all the time has proved axiomatic. There is a roar of global public opinion against the so called coalition war, which, in fact, is nothing but genocide for amassing oil wealth. There may be genuine concern for ordinary loot that miscreants in Baghdad are indulging in, but the great plunder on the oil treasure of Iraq will hardly come under focus, or censure. Such double standards erode the credibility of so called wars of liberation. USA has a historic legacy of justifying any carnage killing, massacre and man-made calamity. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had to be nuked to save a million Americans from death - a great fiction concocted, when Japan had already made up its mind to surrender. The wave of condemnation for Iraq war is a singular success for global community as it amply demonstrates that the flicker of humanism is not extinguished. It may as well prove a harbinger for dismantling of all statues of tyranny not only of Saddam Hussein, who was nurtured and trained to play second fiddle to the global might of USA. So was the case with Osama bin Laden. It is a paradox of history that loyalists when they turn against their mentors, earn the notoriety of being rascals or rouges to be hounded in Torabora or in cosy palaces, as they forfeit their right to live. Iraq war was a great deception to conceal cardinal sin, which the imperialists have committed to deprive the weaker nations of their wealth and assets. The conscientious objectors have seen through this game, and characterize it as moral disaster. Seven Scottish parliamentarians have vowed to sue Blair - British Prime Minister - altar ego of George Bush - in the same court, which had tried Milosovic. The emerging global ethos is for ‘war’ against war.

            Had George Bush heeded to what President Eisonhower had cautioned against the Military-Industrial-Complex which has vested interest in promoting the cult of war, with the intellectual backing of Samuel Huntington, Brezezinski through their vicious Clash of Civilizations idea, USA would not have regressed into acquiring such a jingoistic image and transforming human life into Hobbesian like existence - nasty, brutish and short. The greatest US Army commander of the 20th Century General Douglas MacArthur should have been the role model to emulate who won more territory, and lost fewer lives, and killed fewer people in a shorter period of time, over a greater area than any other man in history. Lazare Carnot - a great military genius of France, had been an ardent advocate of policy of defense and not aggression. When Napoleon planned aggression against Russia, he said, “Napoleon is a fool. Don’t do it. You don’t fight wars except in defense.” As against this, one can see what a havov the doctrine of massive destruction propounded by Collin Powell and his followers. General Myre and Tonny Frank have made of war and at what a colossal cost!

            The grandiose military goal is to establish American domination - Anglo-American Empire - reminiscent of Nazis Germany, a typical fascist notion, and to tell that it is for democracy in Iraq, is tantamount to making a mockery of democracy. As Nigerian paper Guardian rightly forewarned: “If the United States does that, they open themselves to charges of ulterior motives. They are sending a dangerous message to the world. And they put into question the legitimacy of democracy because if its superior representative behaves in this way, then all of democracy will be disappearing.”

            With blood in hand, USA has dismantled the moral pillars that sustain the prospects of peace in the world. The worst blow is to the United Nations, which is in total disarray and has to struggle hard to keep going. Total insecurity and paranoia pervades all over the world. Institutions, which promote sense of purpose and meaning into life, are badly bruised. Erosion of unity of Europe is a colossal calamity. The international law has lost its credence and applicability. The peace of West Phalia Treaty of 1648 - one of the most civilized accomplishments of humanity to maintain dignity and sovereignty of nations has been thrown out of window. The notion of pre-emptive war, is nothing but a crude license for aggression. The irony is that the very principle, so eloquently argued by Robert Jackson, the Chief Prosecutor of the United States, in Nuremberg Trial on 11th November 1945, is now torn into pieces. He had laid down a superb moral standard: “Any resort to war, to any kind of war, is a resort to means that are inherently criminal.” Viewed in this light USA cannot be absolved of crime against humanity.

            What has USA gained except that it has sheepishly implemented what the Zionist Cabal who flew into Bush’s nest, wanted him to attack Iraq. It is no secret that Rumsfled, Paul Wolfwtz and co., practically representing Likud Party of Israel, had sent a signed memorandum to the former President Bill Clinton urging him to destroy Iraq completely, even before George Bush was saddled into power. There is an intense realization that any President, who defies Zionist agenda, is likely to be Watergated, Bush particularly, as his status as elected President is much too controversial.

            The Iraq war ended as speculated as no one could conceive that Saddam Hussein with his relatively primitive fighting machinery, particularly inadequate air power would be able to achieve any worthwhile military objective. Its defeat was forgone but it was expected that Baghdad would not fall like a house of cards and its Republican Guards would be able to inflict heavy casualties, creating Vietnam like syndrome. But it did not happen. Why so, is an intriguing question? Perhaps war on Iraq took a U-turn from engaging directly hand-to-hand with the Iraqi combatants and a Kautilyan approach was adhered to which paid rich dividends. Kautilya had classified war in three categories - open war, concealed war and silent war. The open war strategy was adhered to by the allies. Ruthless use of aerial warfare, cluster bombs and missiles were to cause as much human disaster as possible. The idea was to break the will of the Iraqi people, but they resisted the onslaught without surrendering. They were only waiting for the street fight in Baghdad and the allied soldiers to dismount from their tanks. The allied strategy was to avoid such a risky encounter, which could inflict unbearable casualties. Therefore, they took recourse to concealed war followed by the “silent war operations”. In concealed war they used surprise, deception and targeting of important leaders including Saddam Hussein to be killed, in order to achieve victory without much fight. This also did not quite succeed. In the “silent war” dissensions among command structure were perhaps created which lent easy routes to enter into Baghdad. The strategy seemingly paid as it did in the Afghan War. Only when the fog of war will disappear, the reality would unfold itself as to what really transpired between defiance and capitulation. “Silent War” requires total secrecy. The formidable military might of the allied forces, perhaps did not achieve beyond destruction as the silent war maneuver did.

            Iraq has a historical predisposition to rebuild itself from its ashes. Never in history any nation survived barbarous invasions such as of Mongols and yet recover to become a vibrant force. The real conflict is still in the offing and the region may remain a boiling cauldron for a long long time to come. If Syria is attacked the situation would lead to total chaos in the area. It appears rather ironical that Bush administration should be engaged in implementing Zionist agenda in the Middle East and yet hope to get support of the people of the region. If at all they succeed in winning over the cooperation of the so-called “rulers” they would further be alienating the masses, to create total political rupture. Washington Times, editor Arunde de Borchgrave calls it Bush-Sharon doctrine, “Washington’s Likudniks”, he writes, have been incharge of US policy in the Middle East since the Bush was sworn into the office. While US seeks global hegemony, Sharonites seek regional hegemony over the Middle East. The Iraq war is for energy and global dominance. The motives are more predatory than proselytizing for democracy or liberal values in Iraq.

            M. J. Akbar in his article “The Conflict has just begun” quotes the British Secretary Sir Arthur Balfour who in 1918, without caring for niceties had said, “I do not care under what system we keep the oil. But I am quite clear that it is all-important for us that this oil should be available”. The mission is now passed on to the big brother – USA- on account of its formidable military power and strong filial ties.