The purging of Baghdad

George Bush had Saddam Hussein in his sights almost from the moment he arrived in the White House.

One of his first executive decisions, in February last year, was to order an urgent review of US policy on Iraq. Concluding that America's decade-long strategy of containment was no longer sustainable, and had given Saddam too much wriggle room to rebuild his weapons of mass destruction, the review found the only durable solution was to work to bring about "regime change" in Baghdad.

In that sense, Bush's decision in his State of the Union address to escalate his campaign against terror with a blunt threat of war against Saddam Hussein was not such a revelation.

But what has startled the international community is the stridency of Bush's "axis of evil" rhetoric. This has drawn strong criticism, with French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine dismissing the concept as "simplistic and absurd".

As the coalition backing the US war on terror shows its first signs of splintering, the Bush administration has to grapple with the calculation that an attempt to remove Saddam from power once and for all may attract little, if any, international support.

In his present mindset, however, Bush is not in the business of mollifying world opinion. He appears to be adopting the template of one of his Republican predecessors, Ronald Reagan.

Despite the strong international backlash in response to the US President's warlike noises towards Iraq, Bush has given no hint that he is ready to recant on either the tone or temper of his recent statements. Officials were told to put out the word: "The President means business."

This week, White House spokesman Ari Fleischer cast back to the memory of Reagan's terse exchanges with Mikhail Gorbachev in the momentous final hours of the Soviet empire.

According to Fleischer, Bush, like Reagan, believes the superpower is at its best in a crisis when its strategy is characterised by "moral clarity". Just as Bush has warned in blunt, unambiguous terms that he stands ready to crush the regime in Baghdad, so was Reagan forthright and unstinting in his demands of Gorbachev.

"Ronald Reagan said to Mikhail Gorbachev, `Tear down that wall'," Fleischer reminded the White House press corps on Tuesday. "He didn't say `Would you mind making it a little shorter?' He spoke with moral clarity and, as a result, the world is a better place."

Senior officials insist President Bush does not have on his desk a firm timetable for launching an all-out military offensive against Iraq. Although the war drums are beating, there is little likelihood of the US being primed to strike for at least three months.

In May, the United Nations Security Council is scheduled to debate the sanctions against Iraq, and reinforce its demand for renewed weapons inspections. This may be Saddam's last chance to avert a full-scale American assault.

Bush's aggressive stance signals growing confidence in the upper reaches of the administration that the conditions to mount a successful hot pursuit of the Middle East's most malevolent regime are improving. Why?

That Secretary of State Colin Powell has signed on unreservedly is instructive. Previously, the former armed forces chief was considered an agnostic on the wisdom and viability of proposals to topple the Iraqi dictator, conscious of the dangers of fragmenting support for the broader war on terror.

But, in testimony at a congressional hearing this week, Powell abandoned his usual caution. "This isn't unilateralism," he said. "This is principled leadership."

Significantly, at the same hearing, Powell spoke glowingly of the new mood of strategic cooperation between the US and Russia, and of progress made in establishing a greater sense of trust with China.

The shifting dynamics of US relations with these other great powers could be the key as the Bush administration finetunes its strategy on Iraq.

Outwardly, the strategic risks involved in an all-out assault on Saddam's regime would seem close to prohibitive.

Each of America's important allies in the region - Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey - has its own profound reservations concerning the fallout from any attempt to oust Saddam.

Vice-President Dick Cheney's mission to 10 Middle Eastern nations in mid-March is seen partly as an effort to allay these concerns and rally support for another tilt at the "Butcher of Baghdad".

The risk of inflaming instability in the Middle East has given rise to resistance within the State Department to calls for the US to "go after" Saddam.

Quite apart from the dangers of Baghdad attempting to embroil Israel in any confrontation, Iraq's "frontline neighbours" are highly apprehensive about the risks of US failure.

If Saddam were to endure another assault, this would render him stronger than ever as a regional troublemaker.

Even if an insurrection could be mounted successfully, who would take Saddam's place? The Iraqi opposition is notoriously weak and divided.

Saudi Arabia would be fearful of the risks of Iran seeking to create a de facto satellite state among the Shia population of southern Iraq. Likewise, Turkey would be concerned by the prospects of agitation for a Kurdish homeland that might seek to unite parts of northern Iraq with rebel forces in Turkey's south-east. As for tiny Jordan, how would it cope with another influx of Iraqi refugees?

Moreover, Iraq has succeeded in negotiating a string of sweetheart deals with Turkey, Jordan and Syria, providing oil to its neighbours at heavily discounted prices. They have been warned by Baghdad that any support for US strategy, either overt or covert, would see their supply lines cut.

So what, if anything, has changed in America's favour to make a push against Saddam any less fraught? Here, the attitudes of Russia and China shape as pivotal.

Part of the frustration for America in its attempts to keep Saddam "in his box" after his crushing defeat in the 1991 Gulf War has been the Iraqi leader's capacity to enlist the aid of powerful friends to run interference on his behalf.

In the decade since the Gulf War, Saddam's ruthlessness in eliminating domestic opposition has been matched only by his unrelenting belligerence towards the US and its interests in the region. Although he has not attempted a direct hit against the US since his failed attempt to assassinate George Bush senior in 1993, his "cheat and retreat" tactics to resurrect Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have infuriated American policy makers, compounding their despair at being out-manoeuvred by the Iraqis in the court of world opinion.

In the immediate aftermath of Operation Desert Storm, the Americans were able to persuade the UN Security Council to impose tough economic and trade sanctions, along with the establishment of a UN Special Commission to seek and destroy Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

But as the international community grew steadily more alarmed over the impact of the economic blockade on the living conditions of ordinary Iraqis, the strategy began to unravel.

In 1998, Saddam redoubled his efforts to obstruct and frustrate weapons inspectors. The UNSCOM team withdrew, and the US and Britain launched punitive air strikes on Baghdad.

Inspectors have not been back since. Yet Saddam has succeeded in lobbying Arab neighbours, Russia, China and France to push for a further easing of sanctions.

When Bush came to office a year ago, Saddam appeared on the verge of completing an astonishing manoeuvre: clinching a deal to suspend sanctions while at the same time defying Security Council resolutions that he abandon his weapons programs.

The emergence of a global terror network has magnified US concern. Although no conclusive proof has emerged of Iraqi connections to the September 11 attack, Baghdad remains a sanctuary for Middle East terrorists.

Bush has signalled he believes the nexus is too strong to ignore. Saddam must either give up his ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction or the US will remove his regime from the map.

Here is where subtle shifts in Russia and China's attitudes may come into play. Historically, both have been reliable supporters of Iraq's interests at the UN.

Taken at face value, this week's reported comments of Russian President Vladimir Putin's in The Wall Street Journal suggest the US still has a challenge in overcoming Iraq's extensive links with Moscow. Putin is clearly conscious of pro-Iraqi sentiment at home, especially among retired generals in the Russian defence establishment. Hence his denunciation of elements of Bush's approach.

But it appears Putin also has another strategy in play. In the same interview he stressed he was eager to strengthen the new cooperation between Washington and Moscow since September 11. The implicit message is that Saddam cannot count on unwavering Russian support.

Baghdad has seen this coming for weeks. On January 30, the day after Bush's speech to Congress, Saddam's Vice-President, Tariq Aziz, flew into Moscow expecting tea and sympathy. He was in for a rude shock. Not only was Aziz cold-shouldered by Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, he was told Iraq could expect no solace until it agreed to allow the return of weapons inspectors.

As for China, Bush will travel to Beijing next week for talks with President Jiang Zemin. Inescapably, Iraq will be on the agenda. Watch this space.

Even if an insurrection could be mounted successfully, who would take Saddam's place? The Iraqi opposition is notoriously weak and divided.

Saudi Arabia would be fearful of the risks of Iran seeking to create a de facto satellite state among the Shia population of southern Iraq. Likewise, Turkey would be concerned by the prospects of agitation for a Kurdish homeland that might seek to unite parts of northern Iraq with rebel forces in Turkey's south-east. As for tiny Jordan, how would it cope with another influx of Iraqi refugees?

Moreover, Iraq has succeeded in negotiating a string of sweetheart deals with Turkey, Jordan and Syria, providing oil to its neighbours at heavily discounted prices. They have been warned by Baghdad that any support for US strategy, either overt or covert, would see their supply lines cut.

Some warning, only valid for as long as Saddam controls those supply lines. Well, except for Syria.

The Russians will delay, delay trying to buy time to continue the buildup of Iraq and to make it look like (pretend) they are doing their part. To buy more time the Russians will even ask Iraq to accept inspectors if it means saving Iraq at the last minute.

But inspectors will not fix the problem either even if they are accepted. The same old cat and mouse game will start over again if the inspectors go back. Saddam moved things around and frequently blocked the inspectors until things(WMDs) got moved to another place. The Russians know this. They are very good at chess.

Bottom Line:

Something has to be done very soon about Iraq besides letting inspectors roam around seeing nothing while Iraq continues its buildup of WMDs with Russian AND Chinese help.

--it's not a toothless tiger. A general war could see those supply lines cut by actual physical damage, from wellhead to end user, and everything in between. From US OR iraq itself. They might even be mined already in an armageddon /scorched earth gambit. Remember he torched kuwaits oil fields and it took some time to repair them. All that infrastructure would take time and serious folding $$$$ to replace, and there aren't a lot of alternatives for millions of people in those neighboring countries now that would be "handy" in an immediate practical sense. I think that's just one of the reasons that turkey wants a lot of assurances first. The decade+ embargo has really done a number on their economy, and jordan's as well..

---I think you are probably right. Long range, both russia and china have never given up the dream of being the worlds top dogs. they don't like each other that much, but have more or less always cooperated and traded with each other. They could very well be teaming up long range to cooperate and neutralise the US, with the understanding that at that time they would have to deal with each other, similar to hitler buddying uop with stalin to take poland, then afterwards sorting things out between themselves. And they both support north korea as well, it hasn't made any difference to them what a complete demon kim ill dungeater and his dad was and were.

They talk about putin being a nice guy and a changed russia, last year he accepted literal slaves from north korea as a balance of payments payment. They went to some gulag to work, little reported in the western press, some thousands of them.

Genesis 27

³⁰ Now it happened, as soon as Isaac had finished blessing Jacob, and Jacob had scarcely gone out from the presence of Isaac his father, that Esau his brother came in from his hunting.³¹He also had made savory food, and brought it to his father, and said to his father, "Let my father arise and eat of his son's game, that your soul may bless me."
³²And his father Isaac said to him, "Who are you?"
So he said, "I am your son, your firstborn, Esau."
³³Then Isaac trembled exceedingly, and said, "Who? Where is the one who hunted game and brought it to me? I ate all of it before you came, and I have blessed him--and indeed he shall be blessed."
³⁴When Esau heard the words of his father, he cried with an exceedingly great and bitter cry, and said to his father, "Bless me--me also, O my father!"
³⁵But he said, "Your brother came with deceit and has taken away your blessing."
³⁶And Esau said, "Is he not rightly named Jacob? For he has supplanted me these two times. He took away my birthright, and now look, he has taken away my blessing!" And he said, "Have you not reserved a blessing for me?"
³⁷Then Isaac answered and said to Esau, "Indeed I have made him your master, and all his brethren I have given to him as servants; with grain and wine I have sustained him. What shall I do now for you, my son?"
³⁸And Esau said to his father, "Have you only one blessing, my father? Bless me--me also, O my father!" And Esau lifted up his voice and wept.
³⁹Then Isaac his father answered and said to him:

        "Behold, your dwelling shall be of the fatness of the earth,
        And of the dew of heaven from above.
⁴⁰By your sword you shall live,
        And you shall serve your brother;
        And it shall come to pass, when you become restless,
        That you shall break his yoke from your neck."

By your sword you shall live, And you shall serve your brother; And it shall come to pass, when you become restless, That you shall break his yoke from your neck."

Hmmm...

--well, yes, it is too much to ask them(smile) because old news ain't sexy anymore and it don't sell. I think that's more or less reality. And ritter is tainted now from accepting money from iraq. I have no doubts whatsoever they had cia guys in on those teams, it would have been silly not to, but the whole concept of inspections was silly from the first time he dodged them and stalled them.

There's a variety of reasons and theories put out why george stopped on his run in, the public reason is we accomplished the goal of getting him out of kuwait, but I'd bet a nickle there was threat-a credible threat-of saddam using bios all over the place, not only immediately there, but inside the US and europe. He still could, too, and probably will if it looks like he's got nothing to lose in an assault/invasion. And the mail is just as good a way as it was last time, just imagine thousands of letters all over at random instead of like 6, and other other techniques they can think of. It WOULD have a profound effect on the planets history then, it would be a major turning point into more or less common useage of all forms of WMD.

Armageddon eventually I think it's called.

Bush now would be better advised to do whatever it took to get rid of him without a war, IMO.

HAHAHAHAHA! I just thought of a really funny one. Shrub has some guys whip up this phoney car with the miracle 200 mpg carburetor on it, of the super fuel cell, make it just chock fulla all sorts of bells and whistles and blinky lights and super computers hooked to it and whatnot to "prove' how amazing and fantastic this new secrtet invention is. It's a big secret, see? Super secret hidden invention we got. It comes from area 51 or wherever, really ham it up but good. giggle. He invites in all the ay-rab amabassadors and oil trade guys for a demonstration, to show them this car/engine/process which will make middle eastern oil USELESS. We tell them this whopper story, after a great 'scientific" dog and pony show on how we'll keep this invention secret, and continue the oil business like it is, IF these guys gang up on saddam, bribe whomever needs to be bribed, pull every mullahs string they got, set the el jihaders on saddam, to get rid of him. They do that, we bury the invention, no war, everyone stays happy, they get to keep their cushy jobs, etc..

How's that for out of the box thinking on a silly saturday morning? Osama bought fake nukes for millions of bucks, this might work!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.