Iraq: America Versus The Rest Of The World

Prakash Karat

AS the drums of war are being beaten and Bush prepares for the final moment to unleash America's military machine against Iraq, the isolation of the US from the rest of the world keeps growing.   The other leader, who is under siege, is Bush’s loyal ally Tony Blair, who is facing a revolt within his own party.  The United Nations, for the first time, is set to defy the imperialist superpower.  The timetable scripted by the US-British axis has gone awry.   Pressed by Tony Blair to go for a second resolution to the Security Council, the US had set March 17 as the deadline for adopting the second resolution, which would clear the way for its aggression on Iraq.  But the firm stand of France, Russia and China who have in concert declared that they will oppose such a resolution and the abject failure to muster the nine votes required for passing a resolution has exposed the Anglo-American isolation.  France and Russia have declared that they would veto a second resolution which would authorise war.  The only two countries firmly in the Anglo-American camp are Spain and Bulgaria.

The destruction of the Al Samoud missiles by Iraq and the UN Chief Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix's statement to the Security Council on March 7 that this constituted a "substantial measure of disarmament" further weakened the US-Britain move for authorisation of use of force.

Faced with a humiliating defeat, the Anglo-American axis has retreated.  They are talking of a modified resolution and extending the deadline by a few more days hoping to muster the support of some more countries in the Security Council.

Another blow to the US was the failure of the Turkish Parliament to approve the use of Turkish territory by US troops for staging an attack on the northern flank of Iraq. 62,000 American troops waited in vain to land in Turkey but the proposal fell through failing to get a majority of those present and voting in the house.

For Bush, who sees the war in biblical terms as a fight between good and evil, the United Nations is just an inconvenience.  He declared on March 7 that America would proceed to disarm Iraq whether the United Nations supports the venture or not.  For Blair, the position is much more tricky.   After one-fourth of the Labour Party MPs voted against war in the British Parliament, the revolt is snowballing with one junior minister having resigned. The rebellion has assumed serious proportions after cabinet minister, Claire Short, announced her intention to resign if the British government goes to war without UN sanction. Four other ministers are expected to follow.

The war on Iraq will mark a turning point. For the first time, inter-imperialist contradictions, on a scale not seen since the second world war is unfolding. Even during the Suez crisis of 1956, when the US disagreed with the Anglo-French attack on Egypt, the divisions were not so deep and wide.  France and Germany, the two most powerful countries in Europe are pitted against the unilateralist American drive for total hegemony.  Russia, another major country in Europe, now in the capitalist orbit, is fully backing them.  Capturing the oil resources of Iraq would mean a serious setback to a multi-polar world and the prospects of a strong united Europe.  The March 5 meeting of the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Russia where a joint statement was issued declaring their firm opposition to any resolution authorising war was truly a historic moment.  China endorsed the stand the next day.  The US was served notice that the post-cold war order it seeks to impose centering on its absolute hegemonic role will be challenged. 

The drama in the Security Council and the diplomatic skirmishes are taking place in the background of the biggest anti-war mobilisations ever seen.    The tens of millions of people who have come out all over the world are a force which cannot be ignored by governments, however powerful.  The very governments which are supporting the US war efforts have seen massive and spectacular protests, in Britain, Australia, Italy and Spain, all allies of the US war effort.  India, not being the member of the Security Council, does not need to stand up and be counted unlike Pakistan. The Musharraf regime is caught in a bind.  A vote in the Security Council against America is something which the regime cannot contemplate given its abject reliance on the US.   Voting with the Americans would inflame public opinion and further undercut the regime's credibility.  Abstention is the only way out.

For the BJP-led government, there is no such dilemma.  Their hearts are with the Americans and only public opinion in India and the world prevents them from taking an open position of support.   That is why prime minister, Vajpayee, talks of adopting a "middle path" -- a compromising path meant to keep the Americans happy while formally not associating with the war.  The refusal to adopt a resolution by parliament stating there should be no war on Iraq and that the matter should be resolved peacefully through the United Nations, reveals the double-faced stand of the Vajpayee government.  The US ambassador, Blackwill, is repeatedly asserting that there is no difference between India's stand and the US on how to deal with Iraq.  He demeans India by offering it a share in the post-war "reconstruction" of Iraq.  If there is need for any substantiation of the extent of US influence on this government, it is its stand on the war on Iraq. What is unacceptable to even the traditional allies of the US is palatable to the BJP rulers. 

The stand of the Congress party is also lukewarm.  It does not want to displease the Americans by setting out in bold and categorical terms that it is opposed to the United States' unilateral aggression.  The Congress seems to have also forgotten its close association with Iraq in the past when it ruled the country.   

The military attack on Iraq is imminent.  Bush will not retreat after committing all his forces.  What the Bush administration is now concentrating upon is the post-war occupation of Iraq.  But the consequences of America's criminal war will unfold.  The isolation which the US faces will not be a transient phenomenon.  Underlying, is the growing resistance to the drive for total American hegemony using its brute military might, which has been going on for the past one decade.  The present situation represents a certain fruition of this resistance.  

Just when it seemed the world is helpless to stop America’s war mongering, opposition has come from its strongest and staunchest allies in the imperialist bloc.  More significantly, the worldwide protests show that it is America versus the rest of the world.  As an editorial writer commented in The New York Times, after the  February 15 protests, "there may still be two superpowers on the planet: the United States and world public opinion".