A regular session of the War Experts Collegium took place in Moscow’s House of the Russian Press. The problem on the agenda was how the world would change after the war in Iraq. The Collegium reached a conclusion that when the US/UK war broke out in Iraq contrary to the will of the world community, the world organization started changing for the order when the international law will be replaced with US’s law of power. Participants of the discussion pointed out the following peculiarities of the situation.
Before the war in Iraq the Pentagon schemed that the operations would last 1-2 weeks. The US military command expected that mass airstrikes would demoralize the Iraqi army, the US/UK troops would be welcomed by the Iraqis as liberators from “tyranny”, different regions of the country would be occupied stepwise, no civilians would suffer except for Saddam’s family and the Iraqi administration; the Pentagon planned that oil fields wouldn’t suffer as a result of the operations and would keep on operating, oil produced in Iraq would minimize US’s spending on war; Americans expected that after overthrowing of Saddam’s regime the country would be run by an allied war command just for some period, but then the authority would be handed over to civilians loyal to the occupants.
The ground operation sharply deviated from the US scenario: the war was suddenly delayed because of unexpectedly stiff resistance of the Iraqi people and the home guard, because of the sand storm and the increasing number of losses among the “liberators” which certainly some confusion among the US/UK troops. As it turned out, psychologically Americans were not ready for this scenario even more than the UK troops. They were perfectly sure that Arabs were not a worthy adversary for the US army from the point of view of their military efficiency. The logic of Washington says: if small Israel has been fighting against the whole of the Arab world for over 50 years and is a success with the struggle, then it will take the USA with its enormous military superiority just few days to defeat the Iraqi army. This explains the unconditional triumphant spirits of the Pentagon and White House before and after beginning of the Iraqi war. It’s obvious as well that the US army cannot retreat and will carry the war through irrespective of antiwar protests all over the world, in spite of severe losses among its own troops and ignoring the increasing number of victims among Iraqi civilians.
Iraq won’t be able to resist the USA and Great Britain for too long, as the Iraqi army is equipped with weapons and military technique of the early 1990s. They are certainly of poorer fighting efficiency as compared with forces intruding into the country. For this very reason the Iraqi military command assumed the tactics of defending the cities and involving the enemy in street fighting. This quite naturally brings US’s military superiority to nothing; what is more, America’s losses are increasing in such fighting and the war operation itself gets protracted. However, Iraq is doomed from a strategic point of view, as the USA will inevitably win the war.
It doesn’t matter for the White House any longer whether the war will be long or finishes soon. It’s not accidental that the US President asked the Congress to appropriate extra 75 billion dollars for the war operation in Iraq. Liquidation of Saddam’s regime is of higher importance for George W. Bush and the US Administration, they want to establish control over Iraq even if the victory will cost too much.
The problem of legalizing the anti-Saddam war and future Iraqi regime is also not so much important for the White House. For the time being, Americans have failed to find on the occupied territories any proof of Saddam’s possession of weapons of mass destruction. Well, they may successfully fabricate such proofs later, the same way it had been so much “believably” done in Yugoslavia.
Results of the Iraqi war can be summed up already now when the war is still underway. US’s strategic gain is undoubted: the Iraqi regime, so much disagreeable for the White House, will be overthrown; the USA will become the key participant of the world oil market; the UN and the UN Security Council won’t impede realization of any war plans America schemes in any part of the world, at best, the international organization may turn into an international debating society.
The outbreak of antiwar protests in Europe is dying out. Germany, that strongly protested against the war in Iraq, now receives US wounded delivered from the Iraqi battlefields. France is now also watching how its considerable interest are being trampled on in Iraq.
China didn’t support the US/UK aggression in Iraq; it’s highly likely that China supposed that further serious diplomatic demarches might injure its interests connected with commercial, financial and economic relations with the USA.
Russia President Vladimir Putin voiced position of the country and called the US/UK war in Iraq “a gross political mistake”. However, at that the Russian president hinted at a possible danger of establishment of US’s law of power in the world instead of the present-day international law norms.
The law of power is already coming into effect in the USA as a substitute to the norms of the international law. A US aircraft-carrier has been sent to North Korean shores (the country is also disagreeable for Washington). It’s reported the vessel is meant to participate in Navy manoeuvres, but it seems to be going there for reconnaissance.
MiK News Agency
Europe which is panic-stricken over the consequences of rising energy and food prices could strike a treacherous blow to Ukraine this winter, writes Simon Tisdall for The Guardian.