September 4, 2002	Wednesday	Jamadi-us-Saani25,1423

NEW YORK: When US Vice President Dick Cheney unleashed an attack against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, forswearing that a military action against Baghdad was the only option left to unseat the dictator, the price of crude oil jumped in the international markets.

Everyone knows of Cheney’s deep rooted oil interests, being that he headed one of the biggest petroleum company before he was selected to become the vice-president and his connections with energy giant Enron, but no one raised a hue ad cry about his own interests from which he benefits.

Indeed its a sorry state of affairs in the United States when Cheney’s boss President Bush says a day earlier that he would explore all options before making any decision on military action, the next day his vice-president lays it on the line, saying in essence that a military action is the only option left.

At this time it seems that its the whole world pitted against United States position barring Britain’s Tony Blair who has become Washington’s mouthpiece despite reservations from his own Labour Party.

The Russian President Vladimir Putin, whose eye to eye contact with President Bush made such an impression on the latter that he called him his friend, has made his intentions well known by meeting with all three members of infamous “axis of evil”. He has a deal with Iran and met with the North Korean leader in Russia, and made a $40 billion business deal with the Iraqis.

The US vice-president has taken dim view of the Russian moves, but that has not deterred Putin from seeking restraint by the US in its efforts to launch an attack on Iraq.

There is more skepticism and disapproval than support for the US position said the New York Times in a report.

In Russia, Yuri Shafranik, a former fuel and energy minister turned oil and gas lobbyist, told a newspaper that a war against Iraq would leave Russian investors with only one option: “When the United State strikes, shoot yourself.”

The Times said that the Bush administration’s war talk terrifies those who want to avoid more bloodshed and instability in the Middle East, annoys those who want to focus on more basic concerns such as ample food and clean water, pleases those who want to see a change of government in Iraq and mystifies those who believe that 11 years of deterrence has worked.

In Australia, the prospect of war against Iraq has enraged wheat farmers, who worry that Saddam may make good on his threat to slash grain imports if the Australian government keeps up its tough talk.

The Times said that American war planning has complicated Germany’s close election campaign, antagonized Arab allies like President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, who feel the Palestinian crisis must be solved first and given political cartoonists a flood of fresh material. A cartoon in a recent issue of the French weekly Le Canard Enchaine shows President Bush as a pistol-packing cowboy, articulating a magic formula for prosperity. “It’s simple,” Mr Bush says. “If the Dow Jones doesn’t go up, I’ll annihilate Iraq.”

Meanwhile, within the Bush administration the hawks led by Cheney seek an immediate decision on attack against Saddam, while the doves led by lonely Secretary of State Colin Powell want the diplomatic channels to be explored before any such decision.

Even in 1991 when the international community was rallied against Iraq as it occupied Kuwait while threatening to attack Saudi Arabia, President Bush (Sr) sent has Secretary of State James D. Baker, to the world capitals to forge a coalition and a consensus in the world community to attack Iraq.

Even as the UN Security Council authorized use of force to oust Iraq from Kuwait, Yemen and Cuba voted against the resolution and the unsure Chinese abstained.

Bush it seems is getting such plethora of conflicting and bad advise that he is heeding. He is seemingly unsure of the path he has to take.

In most European nations overwhelming majority of people are against any attack on Iraq, and in the United States, the public opinion in favour of attack is down to 51 per cent from 71 per cent juts six months ago.

Whereas, the Muslim world is unanimous in opposing the US policy on Iraq.

So then the question is why are the hawks in the Bush administration so dogged in their determination to eliminate Saddam Hussein?

Besides the perceived threat of Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction, even the administration is yet to make a case of, it looks as though that the vested interests of the oil lobby and an ill advise from America’s dear friend, Israel, who seeks to delay any resolution of Palestinian conflict, is holding sway.