US suffers setback in military support against Iraq
Iraq, International, 2/9/1998

In a major blow to US efforts to garner support for potential military attacks against Iraq due to the UN-US-Iraq crisis, Saudi Arabia, the most critical and important US ally in the Gulf, has categorically said no to the use of its bases to launch US military operations against Iraq.

This came as US Secretary of Defense William Cohen visited the region to win support for US policies following a recent visit by US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright for a similar purpose. Cohen said "we are hopeful" that the US will not need to use military force if a diplomatic solution is found.

Cohen put a positive tone to the Saudi rejection, saying, "We did not request the use of the bases," knowing that Saudi Arabia would not have acceded to such a demand.

Cohen recently made remarks that expressed doubts that military actions will have the intended results, "I don¹t think that a strike will remove him (Saddam Hussein) from power or that it will fix the problem of inspection." Cohen also said that "I don¹t think anyone should be under the illusion that military action will achieve our goals," Cohen said.

Albright on Sunday stated that if need be, the US will strike Iraq because, "It is in our national interest" and because of potential threats to Iraq's neighbors, since Iraq has used chemical weapons before on its neighbors, Saudi Arabia and Iran. But these two countries have clearly indicated their refusal of military attacks against Iraq.

In a more direct statement as to the intentions of the US, the speaker of the US House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich, asked an international community gathering in Switzerland to "support us at whatever action we have to take, and then support us at whatever level of escalation we may have to take it after that."

Regarding US seriousness to strike Iraq should diplomatic efforts fail, Albright said today, "there is no doubt that we have the authority to do this, the responsibility to do this, and the means and the will." Albright is reportedly the driving force behind the US no-compromise stand against Iraq.

Arab diplomatic efforts continue with Arab League Secretary-General Esmat Abdel Meguid optimistic about a possible solution being negotiated by French and Russian envoys. Meanwhile, Iraqi officials have indicated that inspections by UNSCOM officials are ongoing without any problems and that all efforts will be made to resolve the problems concerning the inspections.
Iraqi Foreign Minister Mohammed al-Sahaf, through a regional tour, will seek support for Iraq from Arab countries.

Albright in her remarks today said that, "There is an understanding that unless Iraq's policies change, we will have no choice but to take strong measures, not pinpricks, but substantial strikes to reduce significantly his capacity to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems and to diminish the threats he poses to Iraq's neighbors and the world."

"Iraq has used weapons of mass destruction before and, if allowed, would surely use them again," Albright said.

There is little doubt that the US is serious about attacking Iraq and that as we¹ve reported before, the US has a strategy stated publicly by US officials known as ³dual containment² against Iraq and Iran. As the previous US arguments for military attacks against Iraq failed to convince anyone that they would achieve any desired effects, and that these attacks would not change the situation in Iraq, as they would neither remove the government, nor the chemical and biological weapons that were described by Secretary of Defense Cohen as being as small as a 5 pound bag of sugar that would destroy a city the size of New York. Such a bag could be hidden anywhere.

It was a priest, involved in a hunger strike against the sanctions that are causing harm to Iraqi children, who made the observation that the US wants to cripple Iraq¹s productive capacity. The US intends to strike milk factories since they have dual use technology. Father Simon Harak with "Voices in the Wilderness" observed that "the sanctions will stay on until they take away" Iraq¹s productive capacity. This is in line with statements made by the State Department and the US ambassador to the UN that Iraq will never see the sanctions lifted.

That leaves many wondering what the motives for the US military actions are, disarming Iraq, or ulterior strategic motives.

The US has yet to propose any solutions that cut clearly to the heart of the matter. That is, open all sites, and with clean certification, sanctions will be lifted. Also, many Arab states have great interest in seeing any chemical or biological weapons destroyed, and even getting rid of Iraqi leadership, but these Arab states do not wish to weaken Iraq itself. The Arab states have in the past and continue to bear the most effects from developments in Iraq, good or bad. No practical solutions have been proposed that consider bringing Arab states' interests and concerns into the fold.

The president of a country (Iraq) is being addressed by the US by his first name (Saddam), an insult the purpose of which is at best puzzling for those who declare that a solution, and not the escalation of the crisis, is being sought.

Previous Stories:
  Means Israel has to deploy in attacking Iraq   (2/6/1998)
  Moussa - Clinton - Blair on Iraq   (2/6/1998)
  Russia: Strong words to the US over Iraq   (2/4/1998)

Please add a link on your webiste pointing to ArabicNews.com and bookmark ArabicNews.com & subscribe to our daily email news bulletin.

Search