Painting a positive picture.... again

Submitted by Bader S (Saudi Arabia), Mar 1, 2006 at 05:40

Once again apologists for the US's mid-east foreign policy, and more specifically the policy on Iraq, are trying to paint a positive picture for the colossal mess that has been created as a result of the stupidity of this policy and fail to identify the strategic tragedy (for the US) that will result when Iraq descends into a full-blown civil war.

Surely one of the aims of Bush's war on terror was to ensure that no failed state would harbor terrorists. As a result of the continued stupidity of US's policy on Iraq, a civil war inevitably leads to a failed state. This colossal failure of the US to create a "free and democratic [and may I add a stable] state" has meant that Iraq has been handed over to the so called Jihadists as a replacement for Afghanistan; and we all know what went on in that once failed state. This strategic failure of the US will mean that its client regimes in Jordan and Saudi Arabia will be more susceptible to terrorist attacks from across the border which may lead to further destabilization of this strategic region.

Already the strategic oil flow from Iraq is well below the amount expected by the US. A civil war may well put another dent in this flow. And the recent attack on the Saudi oil refinery may indicate that the US's strategy to protect (control more like) the supply of oil and gas from the region is likely to prove another failure. After all, how can you control the flow when the infrastructure through which this oil flows is under the constant risk of terrorist attacks?

The Sunnis and Shiites may end up killing each other in a bloody civil war that is the result of the stupidity of the US administration's Iraq policy, but this does not mean that they will stop attacking coalition forces. For once the "Jihadists" have achieved their aim of defeating the US policy to create a "free and democratic state" in Iraq and thus leading instead to the creation of a failed state, their next target will most likely be the coalition forces.

This humongous disaster that is America's Greater Middle East Policy has not "bestowed a historic benefit on Iraqis" as Mr. Pipes points out. On the contrary, this policy has bestowed on the Jihadists a golden opportunity to be based right next door to their targets -- targets that include US client states in the Gulf as well as Jordan and Israel.

How can all this NOT be a strategic tragedy for the US?

As a final point, Bush never fails to point out that Iraq has become the frontline in the war on terror. Do you think that the people of Iraq chose their country to be that frontline? I do not think so. That is why, ultimately, the US must bear the full responsibility for the deaths of innocent Iraqis that have occurred since the illegal invasion of their country. The US and Britain are responsible for everything – be it good or bad – that has occurred in Iraq since the invasion. And to think that the US can fix anything is an illusion. The US can only contribute to more instability through its misguided, delusional, hypocritical, and stupid mid-east policy.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".