Âîéíà â Èðàêå - ìíåíèÿ ïî ïîâîäó... (/)
01/21/2003 | line305b
http://www.economist.com/agenda/PrinterFriendly.cfm?Story_ID=1544881
Exile? Overthrow? Anything but war
Jan 20th 2003
From The Economist Global Agenda
America has suggested that war could be averted if Saddam Hussein were exiled to a third country. Iraq's neighbours are keen on any solution that does not involve a military conflict
WITH America sending ever larger numbers of troops to the Gulf and Britain set to dispatch several thousand of its own soldiers to join them this week, an invasion of Iraq still looks likely. But the story took an intriguing turn at the weekend of January 18th-19th when Donald Rumsfeld, America's hawkish defence secretary, raised the prospect that a war could be avoided if Saddam Hussein and his inner circle were to accept exile in another country. Mr Rumsfeld's comments came just before United Nations weapons inspectors announced the signing of a ten-point agreement with Iraq, which will allow inspectors to interview key individuals, such as scientists, in private.
In an interview with the ABC television network, Mr Rumsfeld suggested that Saddam, his family and his closest lieutenants might win immunity from war-crimes prosecution in return for leaving Iraq. “I think that would be a fair trade to avoid war,” he said. Although Mr Rumsfeld said he was speaking only for himself, the idea has also won support from Colin Powell, America's secretary of state, and his British counterpart, Jack Straw. However, most American officials still think it unlikely that Saddam would agree to step down. Condoleezza Rice, President George Bush's national security adviser, said on January 19th: “It is unlikely this man is going to come down in any other way than to be forced.” She added that the report weapons inspectors are due to present to the UN Security Council on January 27th “probably marks the start of a last phase” of the campaign to change the Iraqi regime.
Although no country has yet openly offered Saddam sanctuary, such an outcome is likely to appeal to Iraq's Arab neighbours, who are desperate to avert a conflict that is certain to damage their economies and might also destabilise their politics and encourage extremism. Envoys from several Middle Eastern countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey, have been criss-crossing the region in the past week, hoping to persuade Saddam to comply with UN demands or step down. Saudi Arabia is reported to be leading a campaign to persuade the Iraqi security forces to overthrow Saddam if he refuses to relinquish power.
The region’s Islamic governments face a tough balancing act. Pulling in one direction is America, on which a number of them depend for their economic survival and political stability. Pulling in the other is Muslim public opinion, overwhelmingly hostile to war. Nine out of ten Turks, for instance, are against.
Even before the latest stand-off with Saddam, Muslims were angry about America’s support for Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians. Now, many believe America has manufactured the Iraqi crisis in order to get its hands on the country’s oil and redraw the political map of the Middle East. That they cannot take to the streets to vent their anger has only increased their frustration—Arab governments have clamped down on any sign of discontent. They worry that if anti-American protests are not held in check, they could trigger a popular backlash—especially in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where Islamist sentiment is on the rise.
Even so, this time around Muslim leaders are being less co-operative with America than they were during the 1991 Gulf war, when all Arab states lined up behind the forces that drove Iraq out of Kuwait. Only a handful are providing bases for American troops. Saddam is hardly popular in other Arab countries, but his relations with some, such as Syria, have improved since the Gulf war.
As America intensifies its preparations for possible war with Iraq, one of its most useful allies in the region, Turkey, has been stubbornly refusing to fall into line. Turkey’s support was crucial in the Gulf war, and the United States is said to want to base up to 80,000 troops in the country. But Turkey has said that it will not allow America to use its military bases without UN backing, and that it could make only a “limited” contribution to any American-led war. This has left America having to try bribery: it has offered to spend tens of millions of dollars upgrading Turkish bases if they are opened up to American warplanes.
The spin coming out of Washington is that Turkey’s powerful and pro-western generals are ready to side with the Americans, but are being held back by the Justice and Development Party, a mildly Islamist grouping that catapulted to power in the November 3rd election. This should be taken with a pinch of salt. The word in Ankara is that Turkey’s soldiers are just as worried about war as its civilians. The army’s chief concern is that Iraq’s Kurds would exploit the turmoil that could follow an Iraqi defeat by setting up their own independent state in the chunk of northern Iraq that has remained under their control since the end of the Gulf war, thereby encouraging separation among Turkish Kurds. Moreover, the presence of American forces in Iraqi Kurdistan would make it that much more difficult for Turkey to carry out its threats to intervene militarily should the Iraqi Kurds seek to break away from Baghdad.
The other worry is the economy. Another war could unravel the modest progress that Turkey has made over the past few months in dragging its economy out of severe recession. The Turks claim to have lost tens of billions of dollars in trade revenues because of economic sanctions slapped on Iraq after the Gulf war. Turkey has been negotiating with America over a multi-billion-dollar package of aid and loans to cushion the economic impact of war.
AP
AP
But will America listen?
Other countries are also worried about the economic impact of fighting. Jordanian industry, for instance, is highly dependent on Iraq, Jordan’s biggest trading partner and its only supplier of oil. In return for food, medicines and clothes, Jordan receives Iraqi oil at very favourable prices. The Jordanian government, like Turkey’s, has been discussing compensation with the United States for any economic damage.
Iraq’s neighbours are also worried about the prospect of refugees spilling over their borders once war starts. Jordan has made it clear it will shut its border with Iraq as soon as conflict breaks out, though it has said it will help the UN to care for refugees on the Iraqi side of the border. Syria is reported to be working to set up field hospitals and relief facilities near its border with Iraq, though it denies this. By one estimate, Jordan, Iran, Syria and Turkey can expect to have to deal with more than 1m refugees in the event of a war. An estimated 2m Iraqis fled the country during the Gulf war.
Given all these concerns, it is hardly surprising that Iraq’s neighbours have been playing for time, voicing opposition to an invasion of Iraq and holding back from offering America military support. Nevertheless, most observers think they are unlikely to have much of an impact on the final outcome. If war did start to seem inevitable, they would be likely—given enough financial carrots—to buckle under American pressure.
Exile? Overthrow? Anything but war
Jan 20th 2003
From The Economist Global Agenda
America has suggested that war could be averted if Saddam Hussein were exiled to a third country. Iraq's neighbours are keen on any solution that does not involve a military conflict
WITH America sending ever larger numbers of troops to the Gulf and Britain set to dispatch several thousand of its own soldiers to join them this week, an invasion of Iraq still looks likely. But the story took an intriguing turn at the weekend of January 18th-19th when Donald Rumsfeld, America's hawkish defence secretary, raised the prospect that a war could be avoided if Saddam Hussein and his inner circle were to accept exile in another country. Mr Rumsfeld's comments came just before United Nations weapons inspectors announced the signing of a ten-point agreement with Iraq, which will allow inspectors to interview key individuals, such as scientists, in private.
In an interview with the ABC television network, Mr Rumsfeld suggested that Saddam, his family and his closest lieutenants might win immunity from war-crimes prosecution in return for leaving Iraq. “I think that would be a fair trade to avoid war,” he said. Although Mr Rumsfeld said he was speaking only for himself, the idea has also won support from Colin Powell, America's secretary of state, and his British counterpart, Jack Straw. However, most American officials still think it unlikely that Saddam would agree to step down. Condoleezza Rice, President George Bush's national security adviser, said on January 19th: “It is unlikely this man is going to come down in any other way than to be forced.” She added that the report weapons inspectors are due to present to the UN Security Council on January 27th “probably marks the start of a last phase” of the campaign to change the Iraqi regime.
Although no country has yet openly offered Saddam sanctuary, such an outcome is likely to appeal to Iraq's Arab neighbours, who are desperate to avert a conflict that is certain to damage their economies and might also destabilise their politics and encourage extremism. Envoys from several Middle Eastern countries, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Turkey, have been criss-crossing the region in the past week, hoping to persuade Saddam to comply with UN demands or step down. Saudi Arabia is reported to be leading a campaign to persuade the Iraqi security forces to overthrow Saddam if he refuses to relinquish power.
The region’s Islamic governments face a tough balancing act. Pulling in one direction is America, on which a number of them depend for their economic survival and political stability. Pulling in the other is Muslim public opinion, overwhelmingly hostile to war. Nine out of ten Turks, for instance, are against.
Even before the latest stand-off with Saddam, Muslims were angry about America’s support for Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians. Now, many believe America has manufactured the Iraqi crisis in order to get its hands on the country’s oil and redraw the political map of the Middle East. That they cannot take to the streets to vent their anger has only increased their frustration—Arab governments have clamped down on any sign of discontent. They worry that if anti-American protests are not held in check, they could trigger a popular backlash—especially in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, where Islamist sentiment is on the rise.
Even so, this time around Muslim leaders are being less co-operative with America than they were during the 1991 Gulf war, when all Arab states lined up behind the forces that drove Iraq out of Kuwait. Only a handful are providing bases for American troops. Saddam is hardly popular in other Arab countries, but his relations with some, such as Syria, have improved since the Gulf war.
As America intensifies its preparations for possible war with Iraq, one of its most useful allies in the region, Turkey, has been stubbornly refusing to fall into line. Turkey’s support was crucial in the Gulf war, and the United States is said to want to base up to 80,000 troops in the country. But Turkey has said that it will not allow America to use its military bases without UN backing, and that it could make only a “limited” contribution to any American-led war. This has left America having to try bribery: it has offered to spend tens of millions of dollars upgrading Turkish bases if they are opened up to American warplanes.
The spin coming out of Washington is that Turkey’s powerful and pro-western generals are ready to side with the Americans, but are being held back by the Justice and Development Party, a mildly Islamist grouping that catapulted to power in the November 3rd election. This should be taken with a pinch of salt. The word in Ankara is that Turkey’s soldiers are just as worried about war as its civilians. The army’s chief concern is that Iraq’s Kurds would exploit the turmoil that could follow an Iraqi defeat by setting up their own independent state in the chunk of northern Iraq that has remained under their control since the end of the Gulf war, thereby encouraging separation among Turkish Kurds. Moreover, the presence of American forces in Iraqi Kurdistan would make it that much more difficult for Turkey to carry out its threats to intervene militarily should the Iraqi Kurds seek to break away from Baghdad.
The other worry is the economy. Another war could unravel the modest progress that Turkey has made over the past few months in dragging its economy out of severe recession. The Turks claim to have lost tens of billions of dollars in trade revenues because of economic sanctions slapped on Iraq after the Gulf war. Turkey has been negotiating with America over a multi-billion-dollar package of aid and loans to cushion the economic impact of war.
AP
AP
But will America listen?
Other countries are also worried about the economic impact of fighting. Jordanian industry, for instance, is highly dependent on Iraq, Jordan’s biggest trading partner and its only supplier of oil. In return for food, medicines and clothes, Jordan receives Iraqi oil at very favourable prices. The Jordanian government, like Turkey’s, has been discussing compensation with the United States for any economic damage.
Iraq’s neighbours are also worried about the prospect of refugees spilling over their borders once war starts. Jordan has made it clear it will shut its border with Iraq as soon as conflict breaks out, though it has said it will help the UN to care for refugees on the Iraqi side of the border. Syria is reported to be working to set up field hospitals and relief facilities near its border with Iraq, though it denies this. By one estimate, Jordan, Iran, Syria and Turkey can expect to have to deal with more than 1m refugees in the event of a war. An estimated 2m Iraqis fled the country during the Gulf war.
Given all these concerns, it is hardly surprising that Iraq’s neighbours have been playing for time, voicing opposition to an invasion of Iraq and holding back from offering America military support. Nevertheless, most observers think they are unlikely to have much of an impact on the final outcome. If war did start to seem inevitable, they would be likely—given enough financial carrots—to buckle under American pressure.