The Clinton administration’s attempt to explain the reasons for their planned military invasion of Iraq had, euphemistically speaking, an ‘inauspicious beginning’ at the Ohio State University (OSU) campus in Columbus, Ohio on February 18. The grossly ill-planned global media event on CNN featured top US policy makers: secretary of State Madeleine Albright, secretary of defence William Cohen; and National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger. It is no coincidence that all three are Zionist Israeli puppets. Robert Novak of the CNN Crossfire raised the question of their loyalties: whether they think of Israeli or American interests first.
They had a herculean task before them. They were to continue to cover up the real intentions behind the current UK-US-Israeli policy. They want: a) to prolong the misery of the Iraqi people due to US sanctions imposed in the name of the UN : b) to test its latest weaponry on innocent Iraqi civilians; c) to stave off precipitous fall in oil prices by disrupting Iraqi (as well as Iranian and Libyan) oil supplies from the world market; d) to keep exploiting the hoax of a threat for bringing all sorts of weapons of mass destruction to this oil rich area of the Gulf; and, e) to use this military might to threaten any potential opponent to the US occupation of the region.
Instead, they had to pretend to save Iraq’s neighbours and the world from the threat of the non-existent Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). Neither his Arab neighbours, who are a better judge of Iraq and its potential threat than the US, nor the world feel the same way. Iraq has been greatly weakened over the last seven years by UNSCOM successfully destroying more Iraqi weapons than the US actually did in the entire Gulf War.
It is true Iraq has used biological and chemical weapons more than once. It was, however, the US which built Saddam’s arsenal and cheered him so long as he was scorching innocent Iranians and pro-Iranian Kurds. The US now argues that Iraq is a repeat offender and can use these WMDs again. But American students as well as the world also know that their government has been the largest supplier of all kinds of weapons of mass destruction. It was this and other instances of hypocrisy and double standards that students on university campuses are questioning.
One of the subliminal objectives of the Gulf War, later clearly repeated many times on the cable History Channel, was to put up a gigantic show of sophisticated weaponry for potential buyers. The US has used more dangerous weapons of mass destruction in several wars, and has been the sole user of nuclear weapons so far in human history. If Iraq is feared because it may use these weapons again, can the same argument not be used against the US with regard to many WMDs in general and nuclear weapons in particular?
Washington had exploited the same argument to justify its horrible but needless war against Iraq in 1991. However, despite the fact that Iraq had far more chemical and biological weapons at that time, it did not use them against the US or its allies - Israel, Saudi Arabia etc during the Gulf War, perhaps fearing retaliation from the coalition partners. This deterrent against Iraq is stronger today.
Is it, therefore, necessary for the US to attack Iraq? If and when Iraq threatens its neighbours and they seek Washington’s help, the US has the wherewithal to deal with such a hypothetical scenario. The US may even choose to ignore such calls for help, as it did by letting the Serbians rape, pillage, and massacre Bosnian Muslims for many years.
The OSU students courageously asked some very pertinent and pointed questions. They demanded that the Iraqi people be freed from the horrendous effects of sanctions and allowed to buy food, medicines and other necessities, instead of being subjected to bombing by an arrogant so-called superpower. The students questioned the double standards of US foreign policy in enforcing compliance with its own UN-manufactured resolutions by using military force against Iraq but ignoring Israeli violations of similar UN resolutions for several decades.
Netanyahu, the greatest opponent of the so-called peace process in the Middle East, has disregarded the US-sponsored Oslo Peace Accords. Any pressure on him from the Clinton administration to be reasonable is considered suicidal for fear of reprisals from the powerful zionist lobby. One of the OSU students asked: why does the US question the human rights record of Iraq and ignores such violations when it comes to applying sanctions against its own allies like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Israel?
In Columbus, Ohio, the three US foreign policy bunglers were at least allowed to make their initial statements. The fourth, Bill Richardson, the US ambassador to the UN, was not allowed to even make such a statement. Students at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis argued with Richardson that they knew what lies he was going to utter. They however let him answer their questions.
Heckling started when they had little new to say at these campuses except parroting the same incredible lies like ‘we love the Iraqi people.’ They sounded like Bush who had said that he had nothing against the Iraqi people. Contrast this cruel lie with the reality revealed by the Voices in the Wilderness which reported that as a direct result of the US imposed embargo against Iraq, about 5,000 children are dying each month since the end of the Gulf War. About one million Iraqis, mostly children and women, have died as a result of the damage caused to the food and health facilities as well as to the physical infrastructure like roads and bridges.
Greatly embarrassed by the foreign policy debacle at the home front and having been denuded before the world by their own global propaganda apparatus like CNN, the administration and the media pundits are nervously engaged in a damage assessment and in devising a ‘corrective’ strategy. However, the absence of humility and the warmongering mindset are coming in the way. Instead of sincerely reflecting on the serious questions raised by the public, a la the OSU students, and finding satisfactory answers for them, they have not toned down the rhetoric.
The US has declared that it may not like even a reasonable solution to the crisis brought about by UN secretary general Kofi Annan unless it is to its liking. This attitude runs contrary to public opinion in America, the UN decision, and wishes of the world for peace with justice and for ending the misery of the Iraqi people.
Providence has its own way of exposing evil and sending a message to the lackadisiacal Muslim world to stand upto their own dictatorial regimes, and their external protectors as the better-informed OSU students did. Reports are trickling in that demonstrations are occurring all over the Muslim world against a possible US attack on Iraq.
Pressure from the hostile US-UK-Israel trio is building on their puppet dictatorial regimes to curb these demonstrations and to muzzle these opposition voices over the airwaves by shutting down radio and television stations.
Muslimedia: March 1-15, 1998