Phyllis Bennis
It is not surprising, and like everyone else we anticipated that some Iraqis
would welcome US troops and cheer their arrival. Many have already tempered
their welcome with urging the US not to stay in Iraq for long. Most Iraqis are
almost certainly relieved and thrilled at the imminent end of a terribly repressive
regime and an end to crippling sanctions. But if yesterday was the party–today
the hangover begins. There are already reports of Iraqis saying the Ba’athist
regime was bad, but that the current lack of authority and its resulting looting
and chaos are worse–“at least before we had security,” one said.
The fact that many Iraqis are pleased with the destruction of the regime does
not mean the US war was legal, justified or appropriate. All of the violations
of the UN Charter inherent in this war are still violations. All of the human
costs paid by Iraqi civilians and unwilling conscripts alike–death, grievous
injury, loss of family members, destruction of property– are still being
paid. We don’t have any idea yet–and may never–of the human toll
from this war.
US officials have again shifted the political justification they are asserting
for the war; now we are supposed to believe the war’s main objective was
always the “liberation of the Iraqi people”–no one is mentioning
Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD), which was the official
basis of the war. So far, of course, no such weapons have been found. Rumsfeld’s
unsubstantiated accusations of phantom WMDs moving across Iraq’s border
into Syria could provide both explanation for the embarrassing lack of WMDs
found so far in Iraq, and potentially new justification for attacking Syria.
The most urgent needs are for water and electricity, especially in cities in
the south, as well as medical supplies. Hospitals in Baghdad over the last several
days were treating as many as 100 new casualties each hour, until they were
overwhelmed and stopped trying to count. Surgical supplies, anesthetics and
electricity were all in short supply even in Baghdad, presumably worse in smaller
cities. The US and UK, as the occupying powers, are obligated under the Geneva
Conventions to immediately provide for those needs. UN agencies have said that
the looting–even of hospitals–may prevent the resumption of humanitarian
assistance.
The long-term legitimacy of any new government in Iraq will be measured by its
authority and support at home, and by international recognition as determined
by the UN General Assembly and individual governments. The key to any legitimacy
will be determined by the process of how a new government, and even any interim
authority are chosen. Any such process orchestrated by the Pentagon (such as
the preemptive move to insert Ahmad Chalabi and dozens of his Iraqi National
Congress cohorts into the fighting to jump-start his bid for a US-sponsored
“presidency”of Iraq) stands in complete violation of international
law or any democratic legitimacy. Chalabi-backer and vice-president Cheney announced
a conference of Iraqi exiles and some from inside Iraq to discuss an interim
authority; within hours his description of the meeting was challenged by the
White House and State Department, indicating a heightened conflict within the
administration over how to orchestrate governance in Iraq.
The United Nations is still the only legitimate authority to orchestrate a process
to select an interim authority. If the US were serious about democratization
in Iraq it would move quickly to turn even preliminary authority over to the
UN to identify an interim authority and move towards a more permanent indigenous
process. The divisions within the administration between supporters of Chalabi
and the Iraqi National Congress (largely the neo-conservatives in the Pentagon
and Cheney’s office) and those advocating broader participation are so
far largely tactical. For example, the new proposal for sharing authority in
post-war Iraq that came from former officials including Eagleburger, Haig, Perry,
Woolsey, Gingrich, Kerrey and Thompson, does not recognize UN authority, but
calls for “helping Iraqis build a new Iraq” only so the US “will
have moral authority to promote its other objectives in the region.” The
UN should have the central role — but only if it has real decision-making
power from the beginning of the process. That means re-opening to the whole
world the already closed bidding process that allowed only a few US corporations
to bid on construction contracts; insuring that the UN is at the center of all
moves to create an interim administration, recruit Iraqis to participate, set
the dates for conferences and elections, etc. If UN authority is compromised,
or the UN is brought into the process only to provide legitimacy to continuing
US control, the UN should not take it on at all.
Oil remains a key consideration. The Israeli press reports negotiations are
underway to reopen the British colonial-era oil pipeline from Mosul to Haifa.
The pipeline was closed in 1948 with the creation of Israel; its reopening would
dramatically increase Israel’s oil independence and lower its energy costs
(oil now imported largely from Russia). This is particularly significant given
Ahmad Chalabi’s longstanding support for Israel and interest, like that
of his Pentagon backers, in normalizing Israeli ties with the Arab world and
maintaining its military power. Further, US special forces moved within one
mile of the rich Kirkuk oil fields; some reporters in the region indicate it
appears that may be their main objective in the area. The US has also just agreed
to allow Turkish military observers into Kirkuk “to verify that Iraqi forces
have withdrawn”–something Washington promised the Kurds it would never
allow.
So, What Do We Call For?
• We call for an end to US occupation of Iraq.
• We call for the United Nations, not the U.S., to help Iraq create a new,
representative and indigenous government. The UN’s central role must involve
real decision-making power; it must not be a fig-leaf designed to provide political
cover to unilateral US action. General Jay Garner’s authority should be
turned over to a United Nations special representative.
• We call for the US to immediately provide for the urgent needs of the
Iraqi population, including water, electricity, medical supplies.
• We will hold the US accountable for its claims that this war is about
democratization and not about empire, oil, and the expansion of US power.
Phyllis is a fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, www.ips-dc.org/.
She has been a writer, analyst and activist on Middle East issues, especially
Israel-Palestine, for 25 years.