Countdown...... seven, six, five....... That’s probably how President Clinton’s whizz-kids (the boys in the basement?) would like to see the fast-moving Iraqi crisis. But no. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, no push-over, has asserted the authority of the United Nations. As his predecessor Dr. Boutros Boutros Ghali, the Egyptian official, discovered a bit too late, sole superpower had assumed that in a post-Cold War World with a greatly weakened Russia (the U. S. S. R. had already disintegrated) the United Nations could have the privilege of seconding any (U.S.) resolution.
But how independent and strong is Secretary-General Kofi Annan? So far he has shown quite plainly that he is not prepared to say “Yes, Sir” / “No Sir” to the United States, No. I. Besides a distinction has to be made, suggest some non-American diplomats and correspondents based in Washington, between President Clinton in his first four-year term and the Clinton administration right now. Domestic affairs, yes domestic affairs in more senses than one have left the Clinton Presidency, severely battered. Thus the U. N. rather than the U. S. line of thinking is strongly supported by Russia, China (both permanent members of the Council) and France, an E.U. member too. It left the trans-atlantic, English- speaking cousins in a minority in the all-powerful Security Council. Sri Lankan readers would have noted that the only permanent Asian member of the Council, the Peoples Republic of China, did not approve the American approach.
Iraq and the non-aligned group have a strong argument, which has a very special appeal to the Arab bloc. If Iraq has to be punished for non-compliance, what of Israel which ignores U. N. resolutions most of the time but is let unpunished? The answer of course is plain enough. Big Uncle Sam.
In a long, turbulent, headline-making career as President, Saddam Hussein’s biggest blunder was his long, costly and meaningless war with the revolutionary Iran of the Ayatollah Khomeni, the Spiritual leader of the Islamic revolution.
The most striking sign of the complete collapse of Washington’s policy of “isolating” Iran was the largest gathering of Islamic leaders in December. The Orgainsation of Islamic Countries (OIC) hosted 34 heads of government, and leading personalities from more than 50 countries. Anwar Faruqi who covered the convention for A. P. the American news agency, wrote:
“The case of Saudi Arabia, the largest oil producer, the region’s wealthiest and traditionally Washington’s staunchest ally, has quietly abandoned its traditional anti-Teheran policy.” Saudi Arabia, says the same writer, is responsive to the idea of “an Islamic axis between the two giants of the Muslim world”.
Washington’s uncompromising policy (European analysts use the word “pathological”) on Iran and Cuba, was severely criticised at the last meeting of the European Community. “We made it clear to President Clinton that we cannot accept the position of the United States” said Jacques Santer, president of the European Commission. He met Mr. Clinton after the ninth annual EU - US officials encounter. “We cannot accept sanctions” he said firmly when he met the press. The case made for sanctions by the Clinton administration that Iran sponsors ‘international terrorism” was brusquely rejected.
While the discussion has by no means ended in the Middle-east from Libya and Algeria to Iran, (and perhaps South and South-east Asia too?) it is clear that Israel is the main enemy and should be the cornerstone of Arab-Islamic strategy. (Nobody talks of Israel’s nuclear capabilities!)
As we watch the fast-moving events, it is clear that Moscow had recognised the Anglo -American game - plan but could not thwart the” cousins”. While NAM commands the largest number of votes in the General Assembly, the non-aligned movement is helpless in the Council, the vital decision-making forum.
“If Saddam Hussein did not exist, we would have to invent him” wrote Fareed Zakaria, managing editor of Foreign Affairs in late 1996. Many an Arab state appreciates the importance of Saddam Hussein in terms of its main enemy/... the Israeli-Turkish alliance, and Iran.
As for anti-American Arab leaders, recent events are a source of comfort — President Clinton’s widely publicised personal problems, and the rising tensions in Israel. But internecine conflicts deny the Arab League any serious chance of using their inherent collective strength, oil to start with, and the natural links with a revivalist, self-confident Islam.
Return to the Editorial/Opinion contents page