US BEGINS WAR ON IRAQ

Will This Barbarity Go Unchallenged?

Harkishan Singh Surjeet

  A LITTLE before we went to press, the US Air Force had started attacking the hapless Iraqis with Cruise missiles. The attacks came barely two hours after the USA’s unilateral deadline to the Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, that he must go into voluntary (sic!) exile immediately, ended at 6.30 a m on March 20.

  IMPERIALIST THIRST FOR WAR

 THIS time, however, contrary to the 1991 war against Iraq, the US has not bothered about the UN system that was set up after the second world war to save the world from any further holocaust. This only exposes the US’s imperialist thirst for war since it emerged as a superpower in the post-war period.

 This is not the place to recall when the US intervened where during the last 58 years and where its mercenaries assassinated which leader; in fact a compilation of the list of such interventions and such assassinations would run into a number of pages of this paper. But even if we cast a glance at the last 15 years only, it suffices to give us a clear indication about the US’s hegemonistic designs. The US instigated a counter-revolution in Yemen and Ethiopia in 1989-90, and the latter country was even broken up. The US also intervened in Somalia in the same period, though it had to beat an ignominious retreat from there. The US launched a deadly war against Iraq in 1991, and backed up the Taliban in Afghanistan in a bid to overthrow President Najibullah’s regime; President Najibullah was even taken prisoner and later killed in a most brutal way. Very soon after that, the US launched another deadly war against Yugoslavia in 1999. And not only that. When elections took place in Yugoslavia after the war, the US most unabashedly interfered in the election process in favour of its puppets who later arrested the wrongly deposed president, Slobodan Milosevic. Then the US, on a very flimsy pretext, bombed Afghanistan and Sudan, and finally launched a deadly war against Afghanistan. And now comes the second war against Iraq on a no less flimsy ground. The loss of a countervailing force because of the USSR’s demise only emboldened the US imperialists, so much so that they have now become the biggest threat to world peace.

  This is not to mention the US’s intervention attempts in Cuba, Venezuela and some other countries through its mercenaries.

  The US hegemonistic design assumed a particularly virulent form after Bush Junior assumed presidency through a most dubious election result. As soon as Bush came to the helm of power in the US, he began to talk about the so-called “axis of evil,” naming Iran, Iraq and North Korea as part of this axis. He even ominously indicated that Libya, Sudan and some other countries could also be included later in this axis. Though in vain, the Bush administration tried all means at its disposal to browbeat North Korea into submission on the so-called nuclear issue.

NO EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS IN IRAQ

AS for Iraq, it was at the US instance that weapons inspectors returned to Iraq after a gap of some four years. It is another matter that the inspections failed to produce the evidence the US desperately needed to launch a war against Iraq. Chief weapons inspector Hans Blix is on record saying that his team did not find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq even though they were not denied access to any place where they wanted to go. In fact, in the two rounds during the last 8 years, as many as 3,845 inspectors have visited the country and inspected as many as 3,392 sites with sophisticated cameras, sensors and other equipment. When the inspectors left Iraq a few days ago, their categorical statement was that they had not found any evidence about Iraq having amassed weapons of mass destruction.

  This showed how vacuous was the US plea that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction and hence needed to be disarmed.

  During the last five years, first under Bill Clinton and then under George Bush, the US also tried to interfere in Iraq through mercenary groups. It tried to bring the so-called Iraqi National Congress and other groups together, and provided them with arms and money so that they could do something to oust Saddam Hussein from power. This was nothing but a move to instigate terrorism against the Iraqi people and leadership, and that too on part of a US president who has been making bombastic claims about waging a “global war against terrorism.” It is another matter that these mercenaries miserably failed to gain any support base among the Iraqi masses and the US, disappointed to the core, was left with no choice but to take the job in its own hands.

  It was in this situation that the US issued ultimatums, not one but many, that President Saddam Hussein must go into exile on his own. A comic part of the story was that the United Arab Emirates, a US satellite, even proposed to offer Saddam asylum for a “life of dignity.” The latest to join in this chorus is Bahrain that houses one of the most heavily armed US bases abroad. But whether it is the UAE or Bahrain, the offer has been made on the ostensible plea of trying to avert a war against Iraq. The logic defies comprehension. If these countries truly want to avert a war in the region, if they are really anxious about regional security as they say, why don’t they tell the US that it must take care of its own affairs and not bother about what kind of regime the other peoples of the world should have?     

  WIDESPREAD OPPOSITION

ONLY a day before yesterday, the US secretary of state Colin Powell claimed that as many as 50 countries were backing the US plan to attack Iraq. In fact, his statement was intended to indicate that the US cared a hoot for the UN sanction. At the level of governments, what Powell says may be true. But has he forgotten that the world public opinion is unambiguously and categorically opposed to the US war on Iraq? If, for example, the Japanese government is shamelessly supporting the US war plan, have not the Japanese people given clear evidence that they are dead opposed to this war?

  The masses the world over have clearly expressed their opposition to the US war on Iraq and the US hegemonistic designs through mighty protest demonstrations on numerous occasions. On February 15 and later, several million people staged protest demonstrations and rallies in New York, Washington and San Francisco, in Santiago and Buenos Aires, in London, Edinburg and other British cities, in Paris, Rome, Milan, Madrid, Istanbul, Bonn and Berlin, Cairo, Pretoria and Johannesburg, in Kolkata, Delhi and Mumbai, in Manila, Sydney, Tokyo and a host of other cities around the world. It is said that the US cities had never witnessed such mighty anti-war protests since the Vietnam war.

An illustrative case in this regard is Great Britain where the Labour prime minister Tony Blair, just like his Conservative predecessor John Major 12 years ago, is totally with the US plan. In fact, whether it is the Labour or the Conservative governments in the UK, most of the time since the second world war they have been playing “his master’s voice” vis-à-vis the US. But, on the other hand, capital London and many other cities of the country have seen mighty anti-war demonstrations. The demonstration that took place in London on February 15 was said to be about three million strong. Other strong protest actions took place in the country only a few days ago. Nay, the pressure of the mass indignation is so great that the UK foreign secretary Robin Cook felt compelled to quit his job, followed by the resignation of two more ministers and protests by a numbers of ruling party MPs.   

 After tendering his resignation, Cook did some plain talking. He said, “the international partnerships most important to us are weakened. The European Union is divided. The Security Council is in stalemate. Those are heavy casualties of war without a single shot yet being fired.”

 Cook further said: “Why is it now that we should take military action to disarm a military capacity that has been there for 20 years and which we helped to create?…. I have heard it said that Iraq has had not months but 12 years in which to disarm, and our patience is exhausted. Yet, it is over 30 years since Resolution 242 called on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories. We do not express the same impatience with the persistent refusal of Israel to comply” (emphases added).

 Lambasting the Koizumi Junichiro government’s decision to go with the US war, Japanese daily Akahata categorically said through an editorial: “The US excuse for attacking Iraq has entirely collapsed. The Bush administration has been unable to provide any evidence that shows the relationship between Iraq and terrorist groups. Weapons of mass destruction, which the US insists Iraq possesses, cannot be the reason to attack Iraq, as the effectiveness of the UN weapons inspection process has been confirmed.”

 In Turkey, under mass pressure, the parliament has already refused the US any facility to use the country’s air bases for a war against Iraq.

 So the likes of Bush and Powell must better not harbour any illusion that the masses would condone whatever they do. All said and done, the plain fact remains that masses have thrown many despots into the dustbin of history.

  US SUFFERS FIRST DEFEAT, IN A SENSE

IN sum, the US intransigence has antagonised the world public opinion beyond measure. It was this antagonism on part of the masses which, in a recent letter written to the war-crazy Bush, several distinguished intellectuals like Noam Chomsky and a host of Nobel laureates gave voice to. The letter said, among other things:

  “Despite the efforts of the UN and several states to moderate the US tendency towards unilateral action --- Security Council resolution 1441 reopened the path towards a diplomatic solution of the conflict --- it appears beyond doubt that, ignoring the results of the UN inspections and the serious objections of many people, institutions and governments all over the world, you are determined to unleash a war against Iraq, one certain to cause even more deaths, misery and desperation to a people already oppressed, their endurance tested to the very limit.”

  Reminding the US president that that world public opinion has not been swayed by imperialist disinformation campaigns, the letter asked: “Does the US government really believe that it is helping to build a more peaceful and democratic world, a fairer, freer and safer world with disinformation campaigns and preventive wars? Are you deaf to the indignant clamour that rises from all over the planet and from within your own country?”     

Nothing may be added to this voice, except that the war the US is out to wage against Iraq is not a “preventive war” but an out and out aggressive war that is aimed at capturing the Iraqi oil resources and using them for the US hegemonistic designs. (See the CPI(M)’s pamphlet, No War On Iraq, for a detailed analysis of the real aim as well as hypocrisy of US war efforts against Iraq.)

It was in this situation that the US came under heavy fire in the UN Security Council on March 19 when it made a last-ditch attempt to hijack this body. France, Russia, China and Germany made it plain that they would at any cost not allow the US to have its way. This was a significant development, though not unexpected. The first three of these are permanent members of the Security Council, and the first two had already made it clear that they would use their veto power if the US wants the UN’s sanction for its war against Iraq. In the end, thus, the Security Council meeting left the US high and dry.

Thus, in a sense, the US has already suffered its first defeat in its war against Iraq. The US had had to withdraw its resolution at the world body.

The development is significant in yet another sense too. One will recall that in 1991, the US was able to cobble a war alliance of some two dozen countries against Iraq. This time, if we leave the minnows like UAE, it is only the UK, Japan and one or two more countries that stand by the US. In 1991, the US and UK were able to hijack the UN and the war they launched against Iraq was, in name, a war by the UN. The same was the case with sanctions. This time, however, the US has failed, and miserably failed, to hijack the UN system. In 1991, by not using the veto power, the renegade called Gorbachev allowed the US to do whatever the latter wanted to do. This time, even Vladimir Putin showed courage to tell the world that his country would use its veto power to thwart the US war designs.

Obviously, zillions of gallons of water have flowed down all the rivers in the world from the Hudson river off the UN headquarters to the Euphrates and Tigris off Baghdad. To this one may add that, compared to 1991, the Iraqis are far more prepared this time --- materially as well as mentally. If Hitler’s hegemonistic designs suffered a rout in the great Sahara desert, who can say the US imperialists will not meet the same fate in the historic desert of Karbala!        

TIME TO ACT FOR INDIANS

IT is here that we the Indians are destined to mourn the loss of our prestige in the international community, thanks to the pro-US government that holds the reins of power at New Delhi. It was not long after our independence that India played a crucial anti-imperialist role when the UK and France attacked Egypt on the issue of Suez Canal nationalisation. Since then, India has always been in the forefront of struggles against imperialism, in support of national liberation struggles, for total disarmament and world peace. Be it the US war in Korea and Vietnam, or the issue of apartheid in South Africa or Namibia’s independence, be it the struggle of the Saharawi or Palestinian people for a homeland or a host of other issues affecting the world affairs, India always played a laudable role --- now individually, now as a leader of the non-aligned movement. It was this thing that earned India an immense amount of prestige in the international community, and the country emerged as a natural leader of the newly liberated, developing countries of the third world.

This was but natural. Having suffered the pangs of slavery for about 190 years, from 1757 till 1947, Indians heartily know the value of independence and rose whenever any country’s independence and sovereignty came under threat. That freedom is indivisible, they very well realise.

But all that glorious tradition of ours seems to have become a thing of the past. Not to talk of other misdemeanours committed by the BJP-led government in foreign policy affairs, which we have detailed more than once, it has failed to take a forthright stand on the issue of US war against Iraq. Even when leaders of the BJP and/or the government have said something meekly on the issue, it has been more in the nature of a homily. They have always refrained from pinpointing the blame for the war and categorically condemning the aggressor. Only two days ago Powell held a teleconference with Indian foreign minister Yashwant Sinha though no one knows what the gist of their talk was.

But this too is natural. For, here we have a party whose predecessors did not take part in our struggle for independence; if anything they only helped the British imperialists by seeking to divide the people on communal lines. Could one expect anything else from this party? VHP general secretary Dr Praveen Togadia has already betrayed the Sangh Parivar’s real thinking on the issue by gleefully expressing his hope that the US would soon beat Iraq, a Muslim country, to pulp.    

But when rulers fail, is it not for the people to act? It is high time the people of this great country rise to the occasion and reassert their glorious tradition of anti-imperialism and of defending the independence and sovereignty of other countries. A day long dharna near the US embassy in New Delhi is to take place on March 22. But this can only be the beginning. The Left and democratic parties have to take the lead in this regard and mobilise the masses all over the country for powerful anti-war actions. Nothing less will be able to bring the BJP-led government back to its senses.

March 20, 2003