Who is in charge?.........

[Thinkerman]

Pax Americana: The building of empire"

Printed on Monday, March 10, 2003 @ 01:24:27 EST ( )

By Firas Al-Atraqchi

YellowTimes.org Columnist (Canada)

 

(YellowTimes.org) – During the Iraq-Iran war,

which bled in excess of one million fatalities on

both sides from 1980 to 1988, Iraq was touted

as the defender of the Arabs' Eastern Gate from the Persian Horde. The

U.S. Reagan administration at the time realized that, if Iraq fell, the

entire oil-rich Arab Persian Gulf would succumb to Iran's virulent brand

of Shiite Islamic governance, stripping the U.S. and the West of vital oil

supplies.

 

The fear in the Reagan administration was that Iran could reach through

Iraq and tie the knot with Syria and Lebanon's Hizbullah. Not only would

Iran control 66 percent of the world's oil supply, but also be in a position

to seriously threaten Israel's security.

 

Consequently, the Reagan administration, with the help of George Bush

Sr.'s CIA, decided to tip the balance in Iraq's favor ever so slightly.

However, the Reagan administration did not yet have diplomatic ties

with Iraq (these were severed after the Camp David Peace Accords

between Egypt and Israel), but did manage to maintain tacit support

through Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

 

It would later emerge that Egypt's late Anwar Sadat, who was despised

by Saddam for the peace deal with Israel, would supply nearly 1 billion

dollars (U.S.) in weapons and ammunition. Iraqi military personnel

would later reveal that the Egyptian weapons were antiquated and

barely functioning.

 

For their part, the Saudis and Kuwaitis poured billions of dollars into

Iraq's military infrastructure, including various weapons of mass

destruction programs. So entrenched in their support of Iraq were the

Kuwaiti authorities that any scrutiny of the Iraqi leadership would be

viciously attacked and vilified.

 

Famed historian Edward Said would later recall his exchange with a : "in an open

conversation with the then Minister of Education Hassan Al-Ibrahim I

accused him and his regime of aiding and abetting Arab fascism in their

financial support of Saddam Hussein. I was told then that Kuwait was

proud to have committed billions of dollars to Saddam's war against 'the

Persians,' as they were then contemptuously called, and that it was a

more important struggle than someone like me could comprehend."

 

However, the Reagan administration was very careful not to tip the

balance too much in Iraq's favor and allowed Israel to supply logistic

and minor military aid to Iran. It seems beyond imagination that Iran

and Israel would aid one another, but wartime does create strange

bedfellows (refer to Israel saving Jordan's King Hussein during Black

September in 1970). This was all hush-hush, of course, but would later

culminate in the famous Iran-Contra Affair, of which Oliver North is so

famously attached.

 

Nevertheless, the mandate was clear; Iraq was to defend the Arab Gulf

states, and by economic extension, the West and the U.S. from Iran's

expansionist Islamic revolution.

 

The Iraq-Iran war ended with a military stalemate, both economies

virtually impotent. Then came the invasion of Kuwait, the 1991 Gulf

War, and 12 years of economic sanctions.

 

In 2003, Iraq is yet again playing a role. This time, ironic as it may

seem, Iraq is the battleground, the last stand between efforts to create

an American Empire and the will of the rest of the world. Indeed, there

may be various economic, moral, or diplomatic reasons why the grand

former colonialist powers of Europe (France, Germany, Austria, Russia,

etc) are so opposed to the U.S. position on Iraq, but they do share a

common trepidation that U.S. foreign policy and its economy will

eventually dominate them, giving rise to the birth of a new Roman

Empire, if you will.

 

History is repeating itself, albeit in a subtle way: today we are on the

threshold of 1914 pre-war Europe as the colonial powers argued

amongst each other in the shadow of nationalistic aspirations.

 

Beyond the shrewd arguments of eliminating weapons of mass

destruction lies the undeniable desire, the overwhelming confidence that

the U.S. is both militarily and economically (not so much this one,

anymore) able to wield its influence around the world. True, the U.S.

has played a major role in policy in most areas of the world, but an

invasion of Iraq would ensure that the "American vision," or pax

Americana, becomes global.

 

In December 2000, George W. Bush told the press that Saddam was a

threat to oil markets and he would "have to be dealt with." In his first

week in office, Bush ordered a token, albeit prophetic, cruise missile

strike on Iraq

 

In the next few months and years, the plan is to have Iraq become a

sterile democracy, its oil wealth would feed world economies for eons to

come, and other regional bullies would fall in line, either through direct

U.S. intervention or to the disgruntled anger of their 'enslaved' peoples.

 

The Middle East conflict, the Palestinian-Israeli quagmire, would be

resolved as militants in Palestine realize they have no support and give

in to peace talks, paving the way for a two-state solution.

 

The U.S. economy would get a viagra-like shot in the arm; millions of

jobs will be created in the U.S. just to fix Iraq's debilitated oil

infrastructure as oil prices plunge to nearly 7 dollars (U.S.) a barrel.

 

Russia's growing influence as a major oil exporter would be diminished;

Saudi Arabia would be abandoned for "greener pastures" (Iraq); and

with democratic institutions blossoming around the Middle East, Islamic

extremism would die out with a whimper. China would remain a paper

tiger as it relies on the U.S. for a stable oil flow.

 

Mirroring the post World War II Marshall Plan, the Middle East, and

subsequently, the rest of the world, will enjoy unprecedented prosperity

under the wings of the American Eagle.

 

While this may sound like a dream to die for, there are innumerable

risks involved. Listing them would require an entire volume of works;

suffice to say there are cultural, religious, and historic grievances that

are not taken into account. Iraq is not Germany; the Germans shared a

common religion, a common philosophic foundation, and a common

white European heritage with the Allies. Iraq has nothing in common

with the U.S.

 

Furthermore, Iraq is not Japan. The Japanese, by tradition, were servile

and obedient to Emperor Hirohito, who was not arrested nor brought to

trial, but left intact as a figurehead for the Japanese to identify with.

Iraq will not have an Iraqi at the helm, but according to news reports, a

white, Christian, American woman -- former Ambassador to Yemen,

Barbara Bodine. She has nothing in common with the Iraqi people.

 

Moreover, the Iraqis, and by extension, the rest of the Arab and Muslim

populace are unlikely to appreciate being "whipped into shape." The

notion that an invasion of Iraq is a final chapter of the Crusades is a

prevalent one in that part of the world.

 

From a strategic point of view, if all goes well, the world will witness the

birth of an empire in the next few months. If something unexpected or

unaccounted for occurs, the empire will be stillborn and global carnage

may follow.

 

[Firas Al-Atraqchi, B.Sc (Physics), M.A. (Journalism and

Communications), is a Canadian journalist with eleven years of

experience covering Middle East issues, oil and gas markets, and the

telecom industry.]

 

Firas Al-Atraqchi encourages your comments:

fatraqchi@YellowTimes.org

[Thinkerman]

I just thought i would also add the following article given that it follows a similar route of discursion

 

Pax Americana: The building of empire" Printed on Monday, March 10, 2003 @ 01:24:27 EST ( )

By Firas Al-Atraqchi

YellowTimes.org Columnist (Canada)

 

(YellowTimes.org) – During the Iraq-Iran war,

which bled in excess of one million fatalities on

both sides from 1980 to 1988, Iraq was touted

as the defender of the Arabs' Eastern Gate from the Persian Horde. The

U.S. Reagan administration at the time realized that, if Iraq fell, the

entire oil-rich Arab Persian Gulf would succumb to Iran's virulent brand

of Shiite Islamic governance, stripping the U.S. and the West of vital oil

supplies.

 

The fear in the Reagan administration was that Iran could reach through

Iraq and tie the knot with Syria and Lebanon's Hizbullah. Not only would

Iran control 66 percent of the world's oil supply, but also be in a position

to seriously threaten Israel's security.

 

Consequently, the Reagan administration, with the help of George Bush

Sr.'s CIA, decided to tip the balance in Iraq's favor ever so slightly.

However, the Reagan administration did not yet have diplomatic ties

with Iraq (these were severed after the Camp David Peace Accords

between Egypt and Israel), but did manage to maintain tacit support

through Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Jordan.

 

It would later emerge that Egypt's late Anwar Sadat, who was despised

by Saddam for the peace deal with Israel, would supply nearly 1 billion

dollars (U.S.) in weapons and ammunition. Iraqi military personnel

would later reveal that the Egyptian weapons were antiquated and

barely functioning.

 

For their part, the Saudis and Kuwaitis poured billions of dollars into

Iraq's military infrastructure, including various weapons of mass

destruction programs. So entrenched in their support of Iraq were the

Kuwaiti authorities that any scrutiny of the Iraqi leadership would be

viciously attacked and vilified.

 

Famed historian Edward Said would later recall his exchange with a "in an open

conversation with the then Minister of Education Hassan Al-Ibrahim I

accused him and his regime of aiding and abetting Arab fascism in their

financial support of Saddam Hussein. I was told then that Kuwait was

proud to have committed billions of dollars to Saddam's war against 'the

Persians,' as they were then contemptuously called, and that it was a

more important struggle than someone like me could comprehend."

 

However, the Reagan administration was very careful not to tip the

balance too much in Iraq's favor and allowed Israel to supply logistic

and minor military aid to Iran. It seems beyond imagination that Iran

and Israel would aid one another, but wartime does create strange

bedfellows (refer to Israel saving Jordan's King Hussein during Black

September in 1970). This was all hush-hush, of course, but would later

culminate in the famous Iran-Contra Affair, of which Oliver North is so

famously attached.

 

Nevertheless, the mandate was clear; Iraq was to defend the Arab Gulf

states, and by economic extension, the West and the U.S. from Iran's

expansionist Islamic revolution.

 

The Iraq-Iran war ended with a military stalemate, both economies

virtually impotent. Then came the invasion of Kuwait, the 1991 Gulf

War, and 12 years of economic sanctions.

 

In 2003, Iraq is yet again playing a role. This time, ironic as it may

seem, Iraq is the battleground, the last stand between efforts to create

an American Empire and the will of the rest of the world. Indeed, there

may be various economic, moral, or diplomatic reasons why the grand

former colonialist powers of Europe (France, Germany, Austria, Russia,

etc) are so opposed to the U.S. position on Iraq, but they do share a

common trepidation that U.S. foreign policy and its economy will

eventually dominate them, giving rise to the birth of a new Roman

Empire, if you will.

 

History is repeating itself, albeit in a subtle way: today we are on the

threshold of 1914 pre-war Europe as the colonial powers argued

amongst each other in the shadow of nationalistic aspirations.

 

Beyond the shrewd arguments of eliminating weapons of mass

destruction lies the undeniable desire, the overwhelming confidence that

the U.S. is both militarily and economically (not so much this one,

anymore) able to wield its influence around the world. True, the U.S.

has played a major role in policy in most areas of the world, but an

invasion of Iraq would ensure that the "American vision," or pax

Americana, becomes global.

 

In December 2000, George W. Bush told the press that Saddam was a

threat to oil markets and he would "have to be dealt with." In his first

week in office, Bush ordered a token, albeit prophetic, cruise missile

strike on Iraq

 

In the next few months and years, the plan is to have Iraq become a

sterile democracy, its oil wealth would feed world economies for eons to

come, and other regional bullies would fall in line, either through direct

U.S. intervention or to the disgruntled anger of their 'enslaved' peoples.

 

The Middle East conflict, the Palestinian-Israeli quagmire, would be

resolved as militants in Palestine realize they have no support and give

in to peace talks, paving the way for a two-state solution.

 

The U.S. economy would get a viagra-like shot in the arm; millions of

jobs will be created in the U.S. just to fix Iraq's debilitated oil

infrastructure as oil prices plunge to nearly 7 dollars (U.S.) a barrel.

 

Russia's growing influence as a major oil exporter would be diminished;

Saudi Arabia would be abandoned for "greener pastures" (Iraq); and

with democratic institutions blossoming around the Middle East, Islamic

extremism would die out with a whimper. China would remain a paper

tiger as it relies on the U.S. for a stable oil flow.

 

Mirroring the post World War II Marshall Plan, the Middle East, and

subsequently, the rest of the world, will enjoy unprecedented prosperity

under the wings of the American Eagle.

 

While this may sound like a dream to die for, there are innumerable

risks involved. Listing them would require an entire volume of works;

suffice to say there are cultural, religious, and historic grievances that

are not taken into account. Iraq is not Germany; the Germans shared a

common religion, a common philosophic foundation, and a common

white European heritage with the Allies. Iraq has nothing in common

with the U.S.

 

Furthermore, Iraq is not Japan. The Japanese, by tradition, were servile

and obedient to Emperor Hirohito, who was not arrested nor brought to

trial, but left intact as a figurehead for the Japanese to identify with.

Iraq will not have an Iraqi at the helm, but according to news reports, a

white, Christian, American woman -- former Ambassador to Yemen,

Barbara Bodine. She has nothing in common with the Iraqi people.

 

Moreover, the Iraqis, and by extension, the rest of the Arab and Muslim

populace are unlikely to appreciate being "whipped into shape." The

notion that an invasion of Iraq is a final chapter of the Crusades is a

prevalent one in that part of the world.

 

From a strategic point of view, if all goes well, the world will witness the

birth of an empire in the next few months. If something unexpected or

unaccounted for occurs, the empire will be stillborn and global carnage

may follow.

 

[Firas Al-Atraqchi, B.Sc (Physics), M.A. (Journalism and

Communications), is a Canadian journalist with eleven years of

experience covering Middle East issues, oil and gas markets, and the

telecom industry.]

 

Firas Al-Atraqchi encourages your comments:

fatraqchi@YellowTimes.org