7. A WAR WHICH WILL GO ON FOR YEARS TO COME * (1)
I feel duty-bound, first of all, to hail the stoical resistance of the Iraqi people against the American and Western aggressors who are staging an all-out, unfair and unequal war against it. It is a military, ideological as well as psychological war. Today, Iraq is facing, all by itself, a thirty-one-State coalition (including Israel and Turkey) with an overall population of 1,200 million against a mere 18 million Iraqis. According to the statistics in the World Bank's 1978 annual report, the combined GDP of the coalition stood at $ 9,300 billion against $ 50 billion for Iraq, representing a ratio of 1 to 210!
That is why I personally think that each minute which Iraq spends holding out before this formidable war machinery is tantamount to a real miracle. Is not the Iraqi resistance a miracle when, during the first week of conflict only, the coalition aircraft made over 10 thousand sorties, unloading more than 1000 thousand tons of bombs over the Iraqi territory, that is 5 times the Hiroshima bomb, or 5 kgs of explosives for each Iraqi? It is a cataclysm, a terrifying catastrophe threatening civilization, man and the environment!
As a matter of fact, I am dismayed to note that all the projections I made at the onset of the crisis have come true. Maybe that was the first time in my life that I found myself hoping I was wrong. The catastrophe had, on the contrary, taken place. I do not think that a country like the U.S.A., which
is only 200 years old, may appreciate the real value of a country like Iraq, the cradle of the most ancient civilizations which flourished in Mesopotamia for over 50 centuries.
Baghdad is, indeed, 1,300 years old. Its Persian name means "gift of God." As for Bassorah, which is yet more ancient, it was formerly called "Al Kuûraïba." The Prophet's companion, Ataba Ibn Ghazouane, had set up therein a military camp under the instructions of Caliph Omar. The Americans are not aware of this great heritage which belongs to all mankind. Worse still, not only do they underestimate it but they deny it downright.
The Gulf War should not be viewed as a regional conflict nor reduced to a simple confrontation between the Judaeo-Christian West and the Islamic world. It is a North-South war, a conflict arising from the Judaeo-Christian civilization's inherent will to exert hegemony over all other civilizations, whether Arab, Asian or African, that is all other forms of civilization which are different from the Western one.
I have already indicated that August 2nd, 1990 marked, from a historical standpoint, the transition to the post-colonial era. January 17, 1991, for its part, will be most likely engraved in the memory of all peoples as the date of onset of the first real world war. In fact, it has nothing to do with the pseudo 1st and 2nd "world" wars which involved only Western countries, in addition to Japan (during the 1939-1945 war).
The Gulf war is much more dangerous and destructive. It can neither be halted by a Security Council resolution nor through an international solution or peace conference. It is a type of confrontation which will most likely last some 10 or 15 years taking various forms, not necessarily military, particularly on the eve of the 21st century which portends huge challenges that are essentially civilizational, rather than political or economic.
The stakes are high. It is human dignity which is involved, the honour of 80% of mankind, who are currently categorized under the label of "Third World." This is the reason why the next battle will be in defense of the diversity of human cultures and values. Hence, it will be a battle against the myth of the universality of Western values.
Being a peace lover, just like the other inhabitants of earth, I take a keen interest in all initiatives encouraging a peaceful solution, may they be promoted by Maghrebi leaders or others. However, I believe that the numerous inflamed declarations made by several European and American parties do not leave room for hope. In its August 19th, 1990 issue, the "Herald Tribune" published on the front page an article stating that Israeli experts were advising the Pentagon to rapidly take action against Iraq lest internal strife break out in other Arab regions.
The "experts" considered the possibility of Iraq's peaceful pull out from the Kuwaiti territory as a catastrophe threatening American and Israeli interests. They called it "the nightmare scenario." Likewise, they showed fear at the idea of convening an urgent international conference to consider the Palestinian question. On December 26th, the nightmare came up again as the New York Times' columnist depicted the disarray of American officials who dreaded a peaceful solution since it would preclude the destruction of the Iraqi military and technological potential.
The "Herald Tribune" also featured, in its December 14th issue, an article by William Safire who straightforwardly declared that the Iraqi troops' pull out from Kuwait was less important than the destruction of Iraq's military potential. He added that the United States had spent billions of dollars for over a decade to be able to achieve this objective, even if this entails that it should shower the region with 100 times more bombs than used during the second world war.
William Safire further said that the presence of the Iraqi army in Kuwait was an occasion for launching air strikes against the Iraqi soil and destroying the Iraqi potential power as well as its water sources. He added that depriving the Iraqis from water supplies would serve Western plans, particularly if they sought to divert water courses to Turkey. How then can we, in such circumstances, believe in the myth of international legality while its fervent advocates are plotting in the dark to attack Iraq.
Six years ago, some Arab researchers attempted, as part of a prospective study, to draw the attention of officials on the risks involved in preserving the same truncated development model and persisting in adopting anti-democratic policies, as that would expose the region to increasing foreign interference and to stimulation, by superpowers, of local conflicts and discord. However, our governments heed only foreign expertise.
Given the above, I think that unless the situation changes promptly, there is no room for hope for a rapid solution, that is within a few days or weeks. It is the fright besetting the Western countries, including the United States, which will raise the cost of war to some 50 or 90 billion dollars. But I believe that the bill to be paid by the West will exceed 100 billion dollars, excluding Iraq's human and material loss.
Whereas Grenada's adventure cost $ 78 million, Panama's reached $ 153 million, but this figure hardly exceeds the cost of a 3-hour battle in the Gulf war, despite the that Congress has curbed the American military budget to $ 300 billion.
In fact, we are currently witnessing the early signs of bankruptcy in certain Members-States of the Gulf Cooperation Council. They have started selling off their assets abroad to finance the war effort, not realizing that the West only seeks to exploit their financial resources especially that it is convinced that things will soon change.
We will get to see how the European Economic Community will make a complete volte-face when it decides that the time has come for its emancipation from the American grip. This scenario is all the more plausible since the U.S.A. is currently entangled in an unprecedented and ever deepening economic crisis. As for us, another type of battle is awaiting us ahead: the battle for democracy, the building up of a civil society on the basis of social justice, the struggle against illiteracy and massive mobilization for the development of human resources and the advancement of scientific and technological research.
The famous "new world order" is already showing signs of unsteadiness and looks braced for even more serious convulsions, especially after the United Nations Organization has lost much of its legitimacy and credibility. To my mind, the only option left for the UN Secretary-General is to hand in his resignation -as he looks crippled by the pressures being exerted on him - and by the fact that he has definitely become the hostage of the United States, a country which has not even settled its arrears to the UN budget.
It seems, today, that the United Nations Organization is doomed to the same fate as the defunct League of Nations. This is all the more likely that it was founded on the basis of the principles lying behind the Atlantic Treaty (August 14, 1941), which was framed by President Franklin Roosevelt and the British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill. The same principles were actually taken up in the Declaration of the United Nations signed on January 1st, 1942.
As for UNESCO, it will be called on to apply the international convention on the safeguard of cultural heritage in the case of an armed conflict (1954). If it does not, we will then be able to see what credibility this institution and its Director General still have and to what extent international conventions are being observed.
What about the League of Arab States? It is dead and buried. It is noteworthy that it was established before the United Nations Organization. In a speech he delivered at Mansion House on May 29th, 1941, Anthony Eden stressed the necessity of setting up an Arab League. His appeal was subsequently endorsed by Nahas Pasha whose relations with English colonialism were notorious. Needless to fetch elsewhere for the reasons of the failure and death of this League which was first crippled, then it collapsed as a result of its submissiveness to the whims of the West.
As for the changes underway in the Maghrebian region, I must point out that on several occasions, and even during a meeting with Chadli Ben Jedid, in May 1990, I expressed apprehension about the prospects for the Arab Maghreb: Judging from the way future moves are being planned and given the fact that the leaders of the five Member-States do not share the same views about the issue of integration, I cannot help feeling such apprehension.
The Gulf events have shown that, in spite of a general consensus on the steps to be taken at Security Council level, there was no shared position among the five governments. I am quite surprised at such amnesia, for none of these States has undertaken the least initiative at the United Nations level on the basis of the UN resolution on Korea war. At that time, when the Security Council was unable to take any decision whatsoever, the American delegation launched a diplomatic move which led the General Assembly to adopt the so-called "united for peace" resolution (November 3rd, 1990).
This resolution was approved by 52 States, with 5 votes against and 2 abstentions. I think that some country has to initiate an action on the basis of the said resolution, for then the USA cannot but yield since it was behind the said resolution in 1950. It is up to the United Nations to put an end to war just as it lies with the General Assembly to take up the issue of the Gulf conflict. This is the last chance for the advocates of legality to show their respect for international law.
I think that the time has come to think seriously about the future and to consider developing our own technology and harnessing our human resources. I invite all intellectuals to read and write extensively and to contribute to enhancing public awareness. We have to keep in mind the fallacies spread by the Western media which denigrate our peoples, cultures, values and causes. I believe that the fight for democracy is a battle for the future of the Arab world. I do not think it mere coincidence that the three Arab countries which were most vehement in their condemnation of the Western aggression (Algeria, Jordan and Yemen) are precisely those which have, more than anyone else, made headway towards real democracy. Perhaps this is the reason why the West is so restless.
I recall that Aurelio Pecci, former President of the Club of Roma, wrote while on his death bed, that what worried him most with respect to the future of the earth was the crisis of world governance. The international system was, he thought, decaying and no longer responsive to the challenges facing mankind. This apprehension came true, I think, in the wake of August 2nd.
My projections for the post-war period are not only based on the functional disorder arising from this governance crisis, but they also allow for the real motives which lie the Western campaign against the Arab world and which stem, above all, from the West's determination to destroy Iraq's industrial infrastructures as well as its scientific and technological base.
Should war still go on for some weeks to come, I do not think it would be
possible for pro-Western Arab States, such as Syria or Egypt, to face up to
their public opinion. But in case of expanded ground battles, dissensions will
in all likelihood break out amidst the armies deployed in the Gulf. Moreover,
Jordan would surely not stand there to just twiddle its thumbs.
Rabat, 25 January, 1991.
* Al-Alam, Rabat, 28 January, 1991.
* Al-Khabar, Algiers, 29 January 1991.
* Al-Chaab, Algiers, 31 January 1991.