The US plays into bin Laden's hands

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

Osama Bin Laden must be elated, even if he is on the run. Al-Qaeda, his brainchild, was created with a rather simple goal in mind - to expel American forces from his former homeland, Saudi Arabia, stationed there since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991.

In that quest, al-Qaeda gained notoriety by taking on the United States with the epic attacks on US soil, galvanizing radical and extremist elements in many parts of the Islamic world. It took the mighty US all of its sophisticated military and intelligence power to stamp out the decidedly primitive Taliban, hosts to al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. Remnants of al-Qaeda who escaped the US onslaught there are now apparently regrouping and planning further attacks. Unwittingly, the US only ended up with a bigger monster for itself and its allies, which now boasts alliances and recruits from over 60 countries all around the world. And bin Laden, apparently alive and well, is eluding the most sophisticated intelligence network in history and retains his capacity to terrify the US and its allies with periodic taped messages issued through Arabic news channels, rallying his followers.

What started out as a seemingly simple mission of "cleansing" the "sacred grounds" of Islam was later elevated to creating an "Islamic caliphate" in the Middle East, free from the tyranny of corrupt Arab regimes. Alarmed at the prospect of popular revolutions along the lines of the Iranian model in 1979, and the rise of Islamic fundamentalism, nearly every autocratic Arab government has now increased their cooperation with the US. Rushing to join the coalition in America's war on terrorism, or providing strategic military bases in the looming US-led war with Iraq. No doubt, motivated by the need for self-preservation or national survival, each Gulf state wants to be in the US camp lest they become pariahs and risk incurring America's odium. Thus the focus has shifted from the war on terrorism to toppling Saddam Hussein, and the rapid military buildup in the region with that stated aim has begun.

To further strengthen relationships with newly-minted Arab allies, America has resorted to its time-honored policy of selling arms to nearly every Arab country that claims to be its friend. Nearly every sheikdom from Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar to Oman has embarked on shopping sprees for arms, spending billions of dollars to acquire advanced tanks, fighter jets, attack helicopters, surveillance and sophisticated intelligence apparatus and other military hardware. It is estimated that since 1990 alone, the Persian gulf region has become the largest market for military hardware in the world, with a staggering US$40 billion already spent on military upgrades in the area. A huge sum by any measure, with the backdrop of dwindling oil revenues, rising unemployment, scant foreign investment and budget deficits faced by almost every supposedly oil-rich nation of the region. Such outlays have even resulted in the transformation of the biggest and richest countries of all, like Saudi Arabia, from a net donor with healthy cash reserves, into a nation now saddled with a deficit, reduced to borrowing billions from the West, and cutting back on essential developmental programs.

Arab regimes started spending heavily on modernizing their armed forces after the Islamic revolution in Iran and the rise of the mullah who detested his corrupt Arab neighbors, supported by the US. A devastating eight-year war during the 1980s pitted the Iranians against the Arab and US-supported Saddam Hussein of Iraq, costing over a million lives on both sides. Though no sooner had that war finally came to an end, than Saddam's forces invaded neighboring Kuwait, again with apparent US acquiescence and knowledge. But now the arms purchases by Gulf Arabs were for their own protection, this time, from Saddam himself, as well as to put down any al-Qaeda-inspired popular uprisings in the countries to overthrow these regimes.

Both Saddam and bin Laden are thus feared and detested by most Arab rulers for very similar reasons, though the two figures have very little in common. Much of the "Arab street" and the Palestinian masses, however, admire both for having stood up to US and Israeli hegemony. However, the public admiration for these two figures is only exceeded by their disdain for the aloof Arab governments who lord over them, by suppressing dissent and violating basic human rights all in the name of maintaining order. The disaffection and seething anger towards the US is a reflection of demonstrated impotence of Arab regimes in the face of Israeli brutality against Palestinians and the open US further tilt towards Israel during the new Bush administration. The ongoing war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, clandestine raids in Yemen, covert operations in Pakistan and elsewhere, as well as impending US attack on Iraq further fuel the fire.

That is not to say that al-Qaeda has not, in fact, achieved some of its objectives. Within hours of September 11, foreign policy experts and terrorism pundits all agreed that these horrific attacks on US soil were meant to send a message to both the Arab regimes and to the US. The fact that 15 of the 19 high-jackers were Saudis was perhaps by design, intended to rile the US and drive a wedge between it and the largest Arab country in the oil-rich region. It is indeed beginning to produce the desired results. The "marriage of convenience" entered into nearly 60 years ago - a US strategic defense shield over the kingdom in exchange for a smooth supply of Arab oil - has come under severe strain. Bilateral relations between these two have been further aggravated by the trillion-dollar lawsuit filed by the relatives of the victims of World Trade Center against members of the Saudi royal family. As if to add insult to injury, some US lawmakers have resorted to openly casting doubts about the Saudi government's sincerity in its cooperation in the war on terrorism, or have outright accused the royal family of financing al-Qaeda. As a result of these changing dynamics, Saudi Arabia is now engaged in a concerted effort to develop a political road map intended to rid the kingdom of its US bases and personnel.

How effective or useful these plans turn out to be to pacify the disaffected masses, only time will tell. History, on the other hand, points towards the imminent downfall of regimes who undertake half-hearted measures, too little, too late, to sooth angry mobs in the street, after years of counting on US support to keep them in power, backed by fancy armaments to keep domestic opposition in check. The demise of previous stalwarts such as the Shah of Iran, Suharto of Indonesia, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines, and Anastacio Samoza of Nicaragua come to mind - all staunchly supported by the US until the last minute, yet unable to escape the wrath of their own poverty-stricken people.

In the present state of affairs, discontent throughout the Islamic world continues to fester, precisely because of the growing suspicion in the region that the war on terrorism and the looming invasion of Iraq are indeed an attack on Islam in the making. The helplessness among Arab leaders in the face of such threats, and their pathetic stance, was on display for all to see at the farcical Arab League summit in Cairo earlier this month. The joint declaration issued expressly states that "no members state is to provide assistance for, or facilitate an attack on Iraq", a member of the club. Never mind that Kuwait, Bahrain and Qatar are already counted as frontline states, providing facilities and assistance for the very reason, and hosting thousands of American soldiers, in the almost certain invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam.

There's no denying, that by toppling Saddam the region will be rid of one of the most aggressive regimes around and will probably eliminate Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. But the problem is that the implication of this impending war goes well beyond Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.

Seen from the angle of the rich and powerful North and the poor and weak South, it doesn't take much stretch of the imagination as to what lies ahead. The expanded NATO, almost entirely made up of Christian West - with the unique exception of Muslim Turkey - will inevitably be drawn in on the side of the US and British forces in any fighting in Iraq. No doubt this unprovoked attack on Iraq will be seen in the greater Islamic world as evidence of the first steps by the US to control Arab oil resources, foreboding a larger clash of civilizations, and the beginning of much grander plan to reshape the Middle East.

Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute recently wrote in The Wall Street Journal: "The war won't end in Baghdad." An inference to next steps favored by hardliners determined to elevate Israeli security above all other US foreign policy goals, would be to destroy any remaining perceived threat to the Jewish state: namely, the regimes in Syria and Iran. Ariel Sharon, in an interview with the Times of London, called on the US to shift its focus to Iran "the day after" the Iraq war ends. Perhaps, even Pakistan will be the cross-hair of this plan lest its nuclear weapons are eventually "perceived" as a threat to Tel Aviv.

As if the US military wasn't powerful enough already, the new doctrine of preemption and preeminence by the Bush administration, carried with swagger and belligerent style, is sending shock waves around the world. A belief, which arises from the widely-held conviction within the Bush team, that the more powerful the US is - and the more blustery its leadership - the more the rest of the world will respect it.

But exactly the opposite is happening. Countries around the world (except for the fractured Arab regimes) are distancing themselves from the US and locking arms to resist wayward America. Millions of people marched recently around the world against the planned attack on Iraq. Some of the biggest and most passionate demonstrations took place in London, Rome, Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Barcelona, Tel Aviv and Sydney - capitals of some of America's closest allies. Even some European governments friendly towards the US openly question the probable impact of war on the broader Muslim world. The US believes that toppling the Iraqi regime will advance democratizing forces in the region. French and Germans foresee the radicalization of Muslims, including large Muslim immigrant populations in Europe. The US views an attack on Iraq as a key element in the war on terrorism, while European governments fear that al-Qaeda will soon enjoy a wave of angry recruits.

The rise of anti-American sentiment in every quarter of the globe is evidence of the Bush administration's impressive job of doing irreparable damage to America's image in the world and to the international order that was constructed under America's watch. The war with Iraq will be a point of no return. Should the US go it alone - even with the British in tow - but without larger international support, it will cease to be a model for the world and instead be seen as a dangerous Goliath that needs to be tamed.

The differences in policies and approach to world affairs, such as the US policy towards Iraq and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts, among US and its traditional European allies, run so deep that they threaten the efficacy and the very existence of institutions such as NATO, the UN and transatlantic alliances. The polarization of anti-war (France, Germany, Russia and China) verses pro-war groups (made up of Britain, Spain and Italy) has even shaken the European Union, a large block destined to rival the US in economic and diplomatic clout.

The principle source of the this erosion, however, is America's belligerent and unilateralist behavior. France, Germany and Russia and other nations are doing their best to block America's rush to war, fully aware that doing so risks invoking Washington's wrath.

On the other hand, and as perhaps the symptom of not thinking through the unintended consequences of its stance as the world's bully, the US is strengthening the hand of protectionists and anti-American elements in Europe, hawks in China and Russia and Islamic extremists throughout the Middle East and Asia. Staunch support of Israeli in its conflict with the Palestinians, and atrocities being committed by Ariel Sharon's army in the occupied territories, have not gone unnoticed in the Arab and Muslim world. And when the US invades Iraq, especially without a UN resolution and a broader international coalition, it provides further boast to extremist elements to further their cause.

On the home front, the fear of terrorism and almost daily alerts by the government, keep the entire nation on edge. Economic turnaround is nowhere in sight, financial losses continue to mount as war preparations continue unimpeded. The disaffection with the status quo has even prompted state and city governments in many parts if the US to pass resolutions opposing a war with Iraq, as well as calling for withholding taxes that make up the federal revenue stream. The anti-war movement has been revived to resemble the Vietnam era. The wave of patriotism and unity witnessed in the aftermath of September 11 has given way to divisions into pro-war and anti-war camps and pessimism about the future. By crippling the US economy based on fear of possible, or probable terrorist attack, any time, anywhere, al-Qaeda seems to have achieved its objectives.

It is almost a foregone conclusion that American troops may be marching in Baghdad in the near future. A victory there, however, will be a hollow one. Without world opinion on its side, the US will find that its long reign as the respected and trusted leader of the free world has come to an end.

The worst outcome of all, with the likely overthrow of Saddam Hussein's government, what Osama bin Laden called in his latest tape an "infidel regime" run by an apostate (while also advocating the overthrow of corrupt Muslim governments from Morocco to Pakistan, all sure to pay a heavy price for remaining silent in this debate), he gets the best recruiting poster he could hope for. Imagine a photo of a US general, probably a Christian, (whom the Bush administration says will run the mostly Muslim Iraq for at least two years), with Arabic words in big bold letters reading: "Oust the Crusaders."

"The rise of anti-American sentiment in every quarter of the globe is evidence of the Bush administration's impressive job of doing irreparable damage to America's image in the world and to the international order that was constructed under America's watch. The war with Iraq will be a point of no return. Should the US go it alone - even with the British in tow - but without larger international support, it will cease to be a model for the world and instead be seen as a dangerous Goliath that needs to be tamed. "

----

The ones who say that are the ones who hate our freedom anyway. They are the same ones who said Reagan was a dangerous cowboy for saying theat Communism would end up on the ash-heap of history. In fact, the anti-Americans today are to a large extent Communists, Socialists, Greens and fellow-travellers. The international socialist community hates American power? What else is new?!?

The people of Iraq will show a different opinion.

So will the people of other tyrannies freed by our actions. It happened in Eastern Europe, it can happen elsewhere.

Should the US go it alone - even with the British in tow - but without larger international support, it will cease to be a model for the world and instead be seen as a dangerous Goliath that needs to be tamed.

Sorry, bub - the list of countries supporting Bush on this is a couple of dozen now, and let's not forget that the UN has 17 resolutions on the topic. This is not, in any sense, "alone" except in somebody's wishful thinking.

This "dangerous Goliath that needs to be tamed" stuff isn't a future prediction, it's a description of thirty or so years of worldwide propaganda, and people who want to will believe it no matter what we do - they did before Iraq and will do so afterward. The difference - and you may thank Osama in part for it - the difference is that we flat-out no longer care.

World opinion does not play in when one threatens anothers family and I am sure GWB feels the same way about his American family and beyond.

We must always remember and never forget:

Statement Warns of More Attacks (Stop support for Israel, Russia, and convert to Islam or else)

Yahoo! ^ | Nov. 16, 2002 | ALAA SHAHINE DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) - A statement attributed to al-Qaida threatened more attacks in New York and Washington unless America stops supporting Israel and converts to Islam, an Arab TV reporter who received the unsigned document said Saturday.

Yosri Fouda, correspondent for the satellite station Al-Jazeera, told The Associated Press he received the six-page document on Wednesday. That was a day after the TV station broadcast an audiotape purportedly made by Osama bin Laden (news - web sites).

Fouda, who is known for good contacts within al-Qaida, would only say that the statement came from his sources with the group. But he insisted he was certain it came from the terrorist movement's leadership.

Fouda, speaking by telephone from London, said the statement called on Americans to stop supporting Israel and other governments that "oppress" Muslims or face more attacks. The statement also called on Americans to convert to Islam, he said.

Fouda quoted the statement as saying: "Stop your support for Israel against the Palestinians, for Russians against the Chechens ... for corrupt leaders in our countries ... (and) leave us alone or expect us in Washington and New York."

He added the statement demanded U.S. troops leave the Arabian Peninsula, and justified the killings of American civilians because they pay taxes that finance military operations.

There was no immediate reaction from Washington. No officials were available for comment at the Pentagon (news - web sites) or the National Security Council Saturday afternoon. A report on the statement as described by Fouda was carried in The Sunday Times of London.

Fouda is a prominent Arab television journalist who has broken several important stories about al-Qaida. In September, Al-Jazeera broadcast Fouda's interviews with two top al-Qaida operatives hiding in Pakistan, Ramzi Binalshibh and Khaled Sheik Mohammed.

Binalshibh was arrested in Karachi, Pakistan, shortly after the broadcast and was transferred to U.S. custody.

Fouda said the statement also referred to the crisis between the United States and Iraq as one more reason to attack Americans.

"You are placing Muslims under siege in Iraq, where children die every day. Oh, how weird that you don't care for 1.5 million Iraqi children who died under siege, but when 3,000 of your compatriots died, the whole world was shaken," Fouda quoted the statement as saying.

Meanwhile, a militant Islamic Web site that carries news about al-Qaida has dismissed as lies a report that a senior member of the terror group is in U.S. custody.

U.S. officials in Washington said Friday that one of the leaders of al-Qaida had been detained in a foreign country and handed over to U.S. authorities.

The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, declined to identify the detainee, but said he was not al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden, his chief depity, his son or the suspected mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks.

The site scoffed at the U.S. officials' refusal to name the detainee. "Maybe they fear to announce a certain name, and al-Qaida would issue a denial so their (the U.S.) situation would become worse," it said. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unwittingly, the US only ended up with a bigger monster for itself and its allies, which now boasts alliances and recruits from over 60 countries all around the world.

Then go there and stomp them out, those directly involved and those who support and enable them. No one said it would be easy. If you've got a nest of coral snakes under your house, you know that you'll have to go in there and wipe them out, because eventually they'll kill your child or your dog if you don't. The longer you delay, the bigger the risk becomes. The job isn't pleasant, but is necessary for your and your loved ones' survival.

And bin Laden, apparently alive and well,

Then keep hunting him down until this is no longer true. It may take some time, but you just keep at it relentlessly. The US could take a cue from the Israelis on this score. Look how they kept after the WWII Nazi scum, and the cowards who perpetrated the '72 Olympics massacre. They just hunted those bastards down one by one and killed them, because that brought justice for the dead and eliminated the threat posed to others. We have 3,000 dead from 9/11, and we owe them and those who survive no less.

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.