------- Forwarded message follows -------
To: ps <[log in to unmask]>
From: portsideMod <[log in to unmask]>
Date sent: Thu, 5 Sep 2002 17:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: The Real Goal Behind US War Plans
Send reply to: [log in to unmask]
[ Double-click this line for list subscription options ]
The real goal is the seizure of Saudi oil.
Iraq is no threat. Bush wants war
to keep US control of the region
==========================================
Mo Mowlam
Comment___The Guardian___September 5, 2002
(Mowlam was a member of Tony Blair's cabinet from
1997-2001)
I keep listening to the words coming from the Bush
administration about Iraq and I become increasingly
alarmed. There seems to be such confusion, but through
it all a grim determination that they are, at some
point, going to launch a military attack. The response
of the British government seems equally confused, but I
just hope that the determination to ultimately attack
Iraq does not form the bedrock of their policy. It is
hard now to see how George Bush can withdraw his
bellicose words and also save face, but I hope that
that is possible. Otherwise I fear greatly for the
Middle East, but also for the rest of the world.
What is most chilling is that the hawks in the Bush
administration must know the risks involved. They must
be aware of the anti-American feeling throughout the
Middle East. They must be aware of the fear in Egypt
and Saudi Arabia that a war against Iraq could unleash
revolutions, disposing of pro-western governments, and
replacing them with populist anti- American Islamist
fundamentalist regimes. We should all remember the
Islamist revolution in Iran. The Shah was backed by the
Americans, but he couldn't stand against the will of
the people. And it is because I am sure that they fully
understand the consequences of their actions, that I am
most afraid. I am drawn to the conclusion that they
must want to create such mayhem.
The many words that are uttered about Saddam Hussein
having weapons of mass destruction, which are never
substantiated with any hard evidence, seem to mean very
little. Even if Saddam had such weapons, why would he
wish to use them? He knows that if he moves to seize
the oilfields in neighbouring countries the full might
of the western world will be ranged against him. He
knows that if he attacks Israel the same fate awaits
him. Comparisons with Hitler are silly - Hitler thought
he could win; Saddam knows he cannot. Even if he has
nuclear weapons he cannot win a war against America.
The United States can easily contain him. They do not
need to try and force him to irrationality.
But that is what Bush seems to want to do. Why is he so
determined to take the risk? The key country in the
Middle East, as far as the Americans are concerned, is
Saudi Arabia: the country with the largest oil reserves
in the world, the country that has been prepared to
calm the oil markets, producing more when prices are
too high and less when there is a glut. The Saudi royal
family has been rewarded with best friend status by the
west for its cooperation. There has been little concern
that the government is undemocratic and breaches human
rights, nor that it is in the grip of an extreme form
of Islam. With American support it has been believed
that the regime can be protected and will do what is
necessary to secure a supply of oil to the west at
reasonably stable prices.
Since September 11, however, it has become increasingly
apparent to the US administration that the Saudi regime
is vulnerable. Both on the streets and in the leading
families, including the royal family, there are
increasingly anti-western voices. Osama bin Laden is
just one prominent example. The love affair with
America is ending. Reports of the removal of billions
of dollars of Saudi investment from the United States
may be difficult to quantify, but they are true. The
possibility of the world's largest oil reserves falling
into the hands of an anti-American, militant Islamist
government is becoming ever more likely - and this is
unacceptable.
The Americans know they cannot stop such a revolution.
They must therefore hope that they can control the
Saudi oil fields, if not the government. And what
better way to do that than to have a large military
force in the field at the time of such disruption. In
the name of saving the west, these vital assets could
be seized and controlled. No longer would the US have
to depend on a corrupt and unpopular royal family to
keep it supplied with cheap oil. If there is chaos in
the region, the US armed forces could be seen as a
global saviour. Under cover of the war on terrorism,
the war to secure oil supplies could be waged.
This whole affair has nothing to do with a threat from
Iraq - there isn't one. It has nothing to do with the
war against terrorism or with morality. Saddam Hussein
is obviously an evil man, but when we were selling arms
to him to keep the Iranians in check he was the same
evil man he is today. He was a pawn then and is a pawn
now. In the same way he served western interests then,
he is now the distraction for the sleight of hand to
protect the west's supply of oil. And where does this
leave the British government? Are they in on the plan
or just part of the smokescreen? The government speaks
of morality and the threat posed by weapons of mass
destruction, but can they really believe it?
momwlm@a...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes
http://finance.yahoo.com
portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a
news, discussion and debate service of the Committees
of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It
aims to provide varied material of interest to people
on the left.
Post : mail to [log in to unmask]
Subscribe : mail to [log in to unmask]
Unsubscribe : mail to [log in to unmask]
List owner : [log in to unmask]
Web address : <http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/portside>
Digest mode : visit Web site
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------- End of forwarded message -------
|
