Republic or Empire?

[pynchonoid]

Posted February 13, 2003

Republic or Empire?

by Joseph Wilson


Print this article
E-mail this article
Write to the editors 
s the senior American diplomat in Baghdad during
Desert Shield, I advocated a muscular US response to
Saddam's brutal annexation of Kuwait in flagrant
violation of the United Nations charter. Only the
credible threat of force could hope to reverse his
invasion. Our in-your-face strategy secured the
release of the 150 American "human
shields"--hostages--but ultimately it took war to
drive Iraq from Kuwait. I was disconsolate at the
failure of diplomacy, but Desert Storm was
necessitated by Saddam's intransigence, it was
sanctioned by the UN and it was conducted with a broad
international military coalition. The goal was
explicit and focused; war was the last resort. 

The upcoming military operation also has one
objective, though different from the several offered
by the Bush Administration. This war is not about
weapons of mass destruction. The intrusive inspections
are disrupting Saddam's programs, as even the
Administration has acknowledged. Nor is it about
terrorism. Virtually all agree war will spawn more
terrorism, not less. It is not even about liberation
of an oppressed people. Killing innocent Iraqi
civilians in a full frontal assault is hardly the only
or best way to liberate a people. The underlying
objective of this war is the imposition of a Pax
Americana on the region and installation of vassal
regimes that will control restive populations. 

Without the firing of a single cruise missile, the
Administration has already established a massive
footprint in the Gulf and Southwest Asia from which to
project power. US generals, admirals and diplomats
have crisscrossed the region like modern-day
proconsuls, cajoling fragile governments to permit
American access and operations from their territories.


Bases have been established as stepping stones to
Afghanistan and Iraq, but also as tripwires in
countries that fear their neighbors. Northern Kuwait
has been ceded to American forces and a significant
military presence established in Bahrain, Saudi
Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman. The
over-the-horizon posture of a decade ago has given way
to boots on the ground and forward command
headquarters. Nations in the region, having contracted
with the United States for their security umbrella,
will now listen when Washington tells them to tailor
policies and curb anti-Western dissent. Hegemony in
the Arab nations of the Gulf has been achieved. 

Meanwhile, Saddam might well squirm, but even without
an invasion, he's finished. He is surrounded,
foreigners are swarming through his palaces, and as
Colin Powell so compellingly showed at the UN, we are
watching and we are listening. International will to
disarm Iraq will not wane as it did in the 1990s, for
the simple reason that George W. Bush keeps
challenging the organization to remain relevant by
keeping pressure on Saddam. Nations that worry that,
as John le Carré puts it, "America has entered one of
its periods of historical madness" will not want to
jettison the one institution that, absent a competing
military power, might constrain US ambition. 

Then what's the point of this new American
imperialism? The neoconservatives with a stranglehold
on the foreign policy of the Republican Party, a party
that traditionally eschewed foreign military
adventures, want to go beyond expanding US global
influence to force revolutionary change on the region.
American pre-eminence in the Gulf is necessary but not
sufficient for the hawks. Nothing short of conquest,
occupation and imposition of handpicked leaders on a
vanquished population will suffice. Iraq is the
linchpin for this broader assault on the region. The
new imperialists will not rest until governments that
ape our worldview are implanted throughout the region,
a breathtakingly ambitious undertaking, smacking of
hubris in the extreme. Arabs who complain about
American-supported antidemocratic regimes today will
find us in even more direct control tomorrow. The
leader of the future in the Arab world will look a lot
more like Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf than Thomas
Jefferson. 

There is a huge risk of overreach in this tack. The
projection of influence and power through the use of
force will breed resistance in the Arab world that
will sorely test our political will and stamina.
Passion for independence is as great in the Arab world
as it is elsewhere. The hawks compare this mission to
Japan and Germany after World War II. It could easily
look like Lebanon, Somalia and Northern Ireland
instead. 

Our global leadership will be undermined as fear gives
way to resentment and strategies to weaken our
stranglehold. American businessmen already complain
about hostility when overseas, and Arabs speak openly
of boycotting American products. Foreign capital is
fleeing American stocks and bonds; the United States
is no longer a friendly destination for international
investors. For a borrow-and-spend Administration, as
this one is, the effects on our economic growth will
be felt for a long time to come. Essential trust has
been seriously damaged and will be difficult to
repair. 

Even in the unlikely event that war does not come to
pass, the would-be imperialists have achieved much of
what they sought, some of it good. It is encouraging
that the international community is looking hard at
terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction. But the upcoming battle for Baghdad and
the lengthy occupation of Iraq will utterly undermine
any steps forward. And with the costs to our military,
our treasury and our international standing, we will
be forced to learn whether our republican roots and
traditions can accommodate the Administration's
imperial ambitions. It may be a bitter lesson. 

Joseph Wilson, chargé d'affaires at the US Embassy in
Baghdad during Desert Shield, was the last US diplomat
to meet with Saddam Hussein. He is an adjunct scholar
at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC.

<http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030303&s=wilson>

... enjoy!

-Doug





__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Send Flowers for Valentine's Day
http://shopping.yahoo.com