First Published: 2007-05-12

 
US Iraqi Initiatives; Much a Do about Nothing
 

If the US administration is serious and honest about addressing the concerns of the international community about Iraq, they should do so by talking to the main protagonist in this conflict. That is Iraqis who refused and are resisting the occupation, says Burhan Al-Chalabi.

 

Middle East Online

Last week the US administration called for yet another initiative on Iraq. Under US pressure, more than 50 countries attended a conference at the exotic holiday resort of Sharm El-Sheikh. Security and debt relief appeared high on the agenda of the conference.

However what is remarkable about this conference is that it will be remembered more for its sound bites rather than for its political agenda. Since President Bush assumed office, this is the first time the international community witnessed the Axis of Evil sharing a conference with the “Great Satan”; presumably, for the Iraqis, to plan for or agree upon more evil for the destiny of Iraq.

This latest initiative is not dis-similar to a host of US initiatives post Iraq’s invasion. They have remarkable similarities. All seem to appear on the political scene when President Bush comes under domestic or international pressure for the war and its conduct in Iraq. Each is void of any relevance to the realities on the ground in Iraq. And all share the same fate of achieving nothing. The fate of Sharm El-Sheikh conference will be no different than its predecessors.

This is no coincidence, as these initiatives have been designed for US party politics, principally to divert US public opinion away from the catastrophic failure of the war in Iraq. Most importantly, to delay addressing the inevitable question. That is, who should be held accountable for the invasion and destruction of Iraq? And for the huge loss of American lives in this military adventure, declared by the UN secretary general Kofi Annan as an illegal war?

If the US administration is serious and honest about addressing the concerns of the international community about Iraq, they should do so by talking to the main protagonist in this conflict. That is Iraqis who refused and are resisting the occupation. The British government did not resolve the conflict in Northern Ireland by talking to the French or the Germans. They did so by talking to Sinn Fein, the political wing of the IRA. The situation in Iraq is no different. General Sir Micheal Rose, a former British Army Commander told the BBC “Insurgents in Iraq are right to try to force US troops out of the country”. This is the present reality of the conflict in Iraq that must be faced, by the current US and UK incumbent, or their imminent future replacements.

Reacting to power sharing in the Northern Ireland assembly, Gerry Adams, President of Sinn Fein commented “I think what today proves is that dialogue and perseverance and tenacity and persistence can bring about results”.

In making the case for war, dialogue and diplomacy were deliberately sidelined in favor of a pro-war agenda of deception, disinformation and misinformation. The waste of innocent lives, British, Iraqis and Americans, should now weigh heavily in favor of righting the wrongs of the war. North Ireland is a province of the UK that suffered injustice. The situation in Iraq is much more fundamental. Until the invasion, Iraq was a sovereign independent state, and a founding member of the UN. Today Iraq’s territorial integrity has been violated by an act of illegal war. This is hard to accept in a nation where dignity, self respect and above all pride represent the most basic fundamentals of life. Iraqis deserves more than US initiatives that are much ado about nothing.

The problems in Iraq are clear for all to see. They are the invasion, the continued occupation and the imposition of a sectarian constitution. Each act represents a fundamental violation of international law.

President Bush invasion forced secular Iraq out and embraced sectarian theocratic regime instead. To restore the status quo, the political landscape of Iraq must be changed. Hard as it may seem, the US needs to admit defeat, and have the political will and courage to stop fighting this hopeless war. No longer as the lord and masters of occupation, but simply another well armed militia group that constantly takes sides. Saving lives and not face savings should be the political order to ending the conflict in Iraq.

The occupation must end sooner or later. The option for the US is to leave sooner with credibility or leave later with memories of the Saigon fiasco. For the Iraqis who suffered so much ending the occupation should be conducted orderly, under the auspicious of the UN. This will guarantee that weak and fragile Iraq doesn’t become a victim to Iran’s regional ambitions. Continuing the occupation of Iraq will leave a scar on the moral conscious of the American people, even deeper than that left by the Vietnam War and with greater risks.

The current US leadership may draw political courage from the determination of George Washington in the American war of independence from the British. The culture of occupation is not resented any less today than the days of George Washington. On the contrary it is resented and rejected much more. Not only by the occupied but by all civilized nations of the world. This begs the question as why Britain decided to invade Iraq twice in a century.

Iraq needs to be given back to the Iraqis, not the ones American chooses. They are most suited and qualified people to rebuild Iraq. The so called Iraqi debts should be relived by a package of compensation provided by coalition of the willing who have participated directly and indirectly in the occupation and destruction of Iraq. Just like in Northern Ireland, rebuilding Iraq will provide the incentive for peace and security.

This current political non entity referred to US and UK political circles as the Iraqi government, is a direct result of a sectarian US political doctrine, imposed on Iraq in violation of international law. This is a repeat performance of the “election”, less credible than those held by previous regimes. Therefore, this government doesn’t represent the people of Iraq. It doesn’t have the political will or support of the Iraqi people. Can not deliver on any promises it chooses to make. It can only serve as an agent of the current political masters, the US administration, to maintain the occupation. The fear for the Iraqis is that, it may end serving a potential future political master, the Tehran government.

Some analyst suggested that the decision to go to war against Iraq was based on oil and glory. To cure US mind set from the Vietnam syndrome. Events since the invasion have demonstrated that these assumptions were simply wrong. With so many wasted lives on all sides, and so much destruction, the challenge now is to have the moral courage, to stop the war and end human suffering. If human life has any value, surely this must be an easier decision to make.

Dr Burhan M. Al-Chalabi is member of the Royal Institute of International Affairs. He can be reached at bmcltd@aol.com

 

Pentagon skeptical about Russia's Syria pullout claims

Senior Saudi prince blasts Trump's "opportunistic" Jerusalem move

Kuwait ruler’s son named defence minister

EU accused of complicity in Libya migrant rights violations

Saudi Arabia lifts decades-long ban on cinemas

Israeli sentenced to four years for arson attack on church

Erdogan risks sabotaging fragile relations with Israel

6.2-magnitude earthquake strikes Iran

Two Gazans killed by Israeli ‘strike’, Israel denies claim

French FM accuses Iran of carving out ‘axis’ of influence

Somali journalist killed in front of children

Over 170 dead after South Sudan rival cattle herders clash

Russia begins partial withdrawal from Syria

Russia weary of returning IS jihadists before World Cup, election

EU says Syria war ‘ongoing’ despite Russia pullout

Istanbul nightclub gunman refuses to testify

Integrating Syrians in Turkey carries implications

US opinion views Muslims and Arabs more favourably but political affiliation makes a difference

Iranian conservative protesters say Trump hastening end of Israel

Jordan referred to UN for failing to arrest Sudanese president

Turkey demands life for journalists in coup bid trial

Netanyahu expects EU to follow suit on Jerusalem

Putin orders withdrawal of ‘significant’ amount of troops from Syria

Putin to meet with Sisi in Cairo

GCC at a critical juncture

Houthi rebels tighten grip on Sanaa after Saleh’s assassination

Israel’s Syrian air strikes risk renewing escalation as Iran expands presence in Golan

Qatar to acquire 24 Typhoon fighters from UK

Bahraini civil society group criticised after Israel visit

Israel PM faces renewed pressure in Europe

Palestinian stabs Israeli guard in ‘terrorist’ attack

UAE’s Sheikh Mohammed says US Jerusalem decision could help terrorists

Fateh encourages more protests, refuses to meet Pence

Chinese electric carmaker to open Morocco factory

Iraqi victory over IS remains fragile

Morocco’s renewed ties with South Africa likely to consolidate support for Western Sahara stance

Lebanese security forces fire tear gas at protestors

Syria’s justice system: ‘working without a written law'

Egypt revives controversial desert capital project

Iran sentences fugitive ex-bank chief to jail

Iraq announces 'end of the war against Daesh'

Israeli air strike kills 2 in Gaza

UK foreign minister in Iran to push for Briton's release

Turkey's Erdogan seeks to lead Muslim response on Jerusalem

Iraqi Christians celebrate in town retaken from IS