|
| |
Ready for the Peace?
By BOB HERBERT
The New York Times, 20 March 2003
Now that U.S. strikes against Iraq have begun, we should get rid of one canard
immediately, and that’s the notion that criticism of the Bush administration
and opposition to this invasion imply in some sense a lack of support or concern
for the men and women who are under arms.
The names of too many of my friends are recorded on the wall of the Vietnam
Memorial for me to tolerate that kind of nonsense. I hope that the war goes
well, that our troops
prevail quickly and that casualties everywhere are kept to a minimum.
But the fact that a war may be quick does not mean that it is wise. Against the
wishes of most of the world, we have plunged not just into war, but toward a
peace that is
potentially more problematic than the war itself.
Are Americans ready to pay the cost in lives and dollars of a long-term military
occupation of Iraq? To what end?
Will an occupation of Iraq increase or decrease our security here at home?
Do most Americans understand that even as we are launching one of the most
devastating air assaults in the history of warfare, private companies are lining
up to reap the riches of rebuilding the very structures we’re in the process
of destroying?
Companies like Halliburton, Schlumberger and the Bechtel Group understand this
conflict a heck of a lot better than most of the men and women who will fight
and die in it, or the armchair patriots who’ll be watching on CNN and cheering
them on.
It’s not unpatriotic to say that there are billions of dollars to be made in
Iraq and that the gold rush is already under way. It’s simply a matter of
fact.
Back in January, an article in The Wall Street Journal noted: "With oil
reserves second only to Saudi Arabia’s, Iraq would offer the oil industry
enormous opportunity should a war topple Saddam Hussein. But the early spoils
would probably go to companies needed to keep Iraq’s already rundown oil
operations running, especially if facilities were further damaged in a war.
Oil-services firms such as Halliburton Co., where Vice President Dick Cheney
formerly served as chief executive, and Schlumberger
Ltd. are seen as favorites for what could be as much as $1.5 billion in
contracts."
There is tremendous unease at the highest levels of the Pentagon about this war
and its aftermath. The president and his civilian advisers are making a big deal
about the
anticipated rejoicing of the liberated populace once the war is over. But Iraq
is an inherently unstable place, and while the forces assembled to chase Saddam
from power are superbly trained for combat, the military is not well prepared
for a long-term occupation in the most volatile region in the world.
What’s driving this war is President Bush’s Manichaean view of the world and
messianic vision of himself, the dangerously grandiose perception of American
power held by
his saber-rattling advisers, and the irresistible lure of Iraq’s enormous oil
reserves.
Polls show that the public is terribly confused about what’s going on, so much
so that some 40 percent believe that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in
the Sept. 11
attacks. That’s really scary. Rather than correct this misconception, the
administration has gone out of its way to reinforce it.
I think the men and women moving militarily against Saddam are among the few
truly brave and even noble individuals left in our society. They have
volunteered for the
dangerous duty of defending the rest of us. But I also believe they are being
put unnecessarily in harm’s way.
As a result of the military buildup, there is hardly a more hobbled leader on
earth at the moment than Saddam Hussein. A skillful marshaling of international
pressure could have forced him from power. But then the Bush administration
would not have had its war and its occupation. It would not have been able to
turn Iraq into an American protectorate, which is as good a term as any for a
colony.
Is it a good idea to liberate the people of Iraq from the clutches of a
degenerate like Saddam Hussein? Sure. But there were better, less dangerous,
ways to go about it.
|