Posted on 03/09/2003 4:26:40 PM PST by FairOpinion
Choosing a subject to write about every two weeks can be a challenge. But lately it has been a snap.
Everything, it seems, must be about Iraq these days: Saddam this and Saddam that, work with the United Nations or go it alone, patriots for war and patriots against.
Flipping through the channels the other night I caught the final few minutes of Jay Leno's "Tonight Show" featuring the latest singing sensation from Russia, a duo called t.A.T.u. I have no clue what the name stands for, no idea if the music was any good, but the outfits were eye-catching. In big black letters on their white T-shirts, young talents Julia Volkova and Lena Katina sported a Russian variation of "Down With the War," but in a lot snappier and more obscene language involving a direct reference to the male anatomy.
The last time I saw the word it was scrawled on the wall of a public toilet at a Moscow railway station. Apparently, Leno and his staff are not big on languages.
They should have known better, though, because everybody now has something to say about the upcoming war. Right-wing talk-show hosts scream about the deceitful liberals who don't support our sons and daughters in uniform. Those leaning in the other direction are outraged at the idea of going to what they see as a senseless war.
The crowds that hit the streets around the world last month to protest the war also were fuming. Among the photos available from the wire services, there was a German guy suggesting dropping Bush, not bombs. There was a "Free Palestine" rally. There was a group of people in Pakistan with a portrait of Osama bin Laden looking thoughtful. And there was a woman in Washington waving a pro-choice sign.
A bit clueless? Probably -- just like those anti-global-trade protesters over the past few years who believe they can make the world a better, kinder, fairer place by torching a few cars and breaking windows at McDonald's.
Yet those people in the streets, even though many of them likely would have trouble finding Iraq on the map, at least appeared sincere. Some of them maybe even believed that love is the answer. Their leaders, on the other hand, would beg to differ.
Bush's bold (many would say stubborn) stand on Baghdad triggered such a global game of politics, ambition and economics, that the terribly oppressed Iraqis, with their bizarre and truly creepy ruler at the epicenter, sometimes seem forgotten at the epicenter.
Is France genuinely worried about keeping peace at any price, or about its own rather weak position in post-Cold War Europe? And does anyone suppose that in case the United States goes it alone and its military campaign in Iraq is a success, France or Germany will angrily refuse to participate in the post-war development of the oil-rich country?
And the Russians, yet another U.N. Security Council vote the United States needs badly, just received a valuable present from Washington, as the U.S. government added three Chechen rebel groups to its list of terrorist organizations, saying their leaders are linked to al-Qaida. The decision gives a boost to the Kremlin's claim that Russia is doing the right thing in its restive southern republic. Whether that will be enough for Moscow to forget the insult of the United States trashing the ABM treaty remains to be seen. But the already remote possibility of a Russian veto of the U.S.-backed resolution on Iraq -- if there is one -- just became more remote.
Incidentally, those who admire French and Russian support of continuous U.N. inspections may recall that both countries abstained in 1991 when the Security Council voted to undertake them.
As those political and economic games develop, the continuing argument over whether Saddam is hiding chemical and biological arsenals seems gradually to be losing importance and even borders on the irrelevant. Seriously, does anyone really believe he does not have those weapons?
Well, there are a couple of people who might. Veteran CBS anchor Dan Rather was not the only visitor Saddam has welcomed to one of his "undisclosed locations" (Dick Cheney doesn't have a monopoly on those, by the way). Gennady Zyuganov, the leader of the Russian Communist Party, just came back from a trip to Baghdad and a sit-down with Saddam. In a recent interview, the top Russian Communist praised the Iraqi leader for his "straight, clear thinking," "desire for peace" and "deep care for his people," even though the record of Saddam's Baath Party includes the extermination of Iraqi Communists not too long ago.
Another Friend of Saddam who visited the Iraqi leader recently and spoke of his regime with admiration is Jean-Marie Le Pen, the notorious French ultranationalist who almost beat Jacques Chirac to the presidency.
Finding oneself on the same side with the likes of such "peacemakers" as Zyuganov and Le Pen -- no matter the occasion -- is a truly bad sign. With opponents like that, Bush doesn't really need too many friends. _________
Michael Nakoryakov is editor of The Tribune's World Desk. For many years, he was a journalist in Moscow. Send Nakoryakov an e-mail at michaelvn@sltrib.com
A Communist, a Fascist, and an idiot (Jimmy Carter) are all against the war to liberate Iraq.
Lovers of freedom and supporters of American resolve and war on terror support this war to liberate Iraq.
Choose sides, everyone!
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.