Hawks and vultures
Danger of U.S. war against Iraq grows
By John Catalinotto
The Bush administration is closer to moving aggressively
against Iraq, according to many reports. The anti-war movement
here needs to be alert to the danger of a new war against
Iraq.
Such a war would undoubtedly involve large numbers of U.S.
ground forces and the potential for heavy U.S. casualties,
which could arouse strong anti-war sentiment in this country.
And even if Washington failed in its objective to overthrow the
Baghdad government and replace it with a client regime, such a
war would inflict additional horrors on the already suffering
Iraqi people.
The latest round of Iraq baiting began Nov. 26, when
President George W. Bush told reporters, "Afghanistan is still
just the beginning." He demanded that Iraq allow "inspectors"
into the country--or else.
The last time these inspectors were inside Iraq they
conducted military spying for the United States. Former
inspection leader Scott Ritter has publicly admitted this many
times.
Bush could point to no connection between Iraq and the Sept.
11 attacks. Nor could he tie Iraq to the anthrax threat. But
none of that mattered. The president said, "If you develop
weapons of mass destruction that you want to terrorize the
world, you'll be held accountable."
U.S. imperialists--who wield the mightiest weapons of mass
destruction on the planet-- use the phrase "weapons of mass
destruction" to make it seem as though Iraq is the oppressor,
not the Pentagon.
Hawks and vultures
The Dec. 3 New York Times reported that a grouping "inside
and outside the administration" is leading the drive toward war
with Iraq. They include old Cold War figures like Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz, retired Gen. Wayne Downing--the president's
counter-terrorism chief--and I. Lewis Libby, the vice
president's chief of staff.
This group wants to use U.S. force to put a puppet Iraqi
grouping in power.
Also included in the grouping are Henry Kissinger, former
Vice President Dan Quayle and former CIA head James
Woolsey--all part of the 18-member Defense Policy Board.
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich is part of this gang. As
far as Gingrich is concerned, "the 'Saddam is evil and
dangerous' side seems to be winning." In other words, Gingrich
thinks his more aggressive grouping has the initiative.
The opponents of this group are not exactly doves. Secretary
of State Colin Powell and retired Gen. Anthony Zinni are among
them. They are for aggressively pursuing the war against
Afghanistan. However, they believe that Washington and the
Pentagon will overreach themselves if they try to take on a new
war against Iraq at this time.
Will U.S. be isolated?
They also know that this war has little support among many
of the forces in Europe that support the United States in
Afghanistan, and that Washington may find itself fighting Iraq
alone.
The real debate about whether to wage war on Iraq is carried
out behind closed doors, with no pretense of an open discussion
that includes the mass of the U.S. population. Meanwhile, both
sides of this ruling-class debate try to keep the country on a
war footing.
Many British newspapers report that French President Jacques
Chirac, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and even British
Prime Minister Tony Blair have let Washington know they oppose
an attack on Iraq at this time.
Whether this will turn into real resistance to U.S. plans,
however, is doubtful. During NATO's war against Yugoslavia, for
example, the United States was able to impose its strategy of
bombing civilian targets in Serbia despite some objections from
its European imperialist allies.
Europeans see shift in U.S. policy
The Dec. 2 issue of the British newspaper The Observer was
headlined "Secret U.S. Plan for Iraq War." The paper reported
that the United States "intends to depose Saddam Hussein by
giving armed support to Iraqi opposition forces across the
country."
According to this article, the U.S. plan "envisages a
combined operation with U.S. bombers targeting key military
installations while U.S. forces assist opposition groups in the
North and South of the country in a stage-managed uprising. One
version of the plan would have U.S. forces fighting on the
ground."
While this scenario is still in the planning stage, people
like Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponek--both former heads of
the United Nations-run "Oil for Peace" program for Iraq--take
the threat to Iraq seriously.
Halliday and von Sponek wrote an article in the Nov. 29
issue of the British newspaper The Guardian that began: "A
major shift is occurring in U.S. policy on Iraq. It is obvious
that Washington wants to end 11 years of a self-serving policy
of containment of the Iraqi regime and change to a policy of
replacing, by force, Saddam Hussein and his government.
"The current policy of economic sanctions has destroyed
society in Iraq and caused the death of thousands, young and
old. There is evidence of that daily in reports from reputable
international organizations such as Caritas, Unicef and Save
the Children. A change to a policy of replacement by force will
increase that suffering."
The two also noted that "the U.S. Defense Department, and
Richard Butler, former head of the UN arms inspection team in
Baghdad, would prefer Iraq to have been behind the anthrax
scare. But they had to recognize that it had its origin within
the U.S."
They added, "British and U.S. intelligence agencies know
well that Iraq is qualitatively disarmed," thereby answering
Bush's charge of "weapons of mass destruction" as an excuse for
waging aggressive war on Iraq.
If the administration makes up its mind to go to war,
however, it will manufacture the excuse. The anti-war movement
here will have to be on guard to expose the lies and stop the
imperialist war.
Reprinted from the Dec. 13, 2001, issue of
Workers World newspaper
This article is copyright under a Creative
Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
HOME
:: U.S. NEWS ::
WORLD NEWS ::
EDITORIALS ::
SUBSCRIBE ::
DONATE
Email
this article
Printable
page