| May 6, 2003 | Tuesday | Rabi-ul-Awwal 3, 1424 |
Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)
Pullout from Saudi Arabia
Across the barriers
AMERICA is not going to monopolize Iraq — that is the fiction at least. As reports have it, Iraq will be divided into three zones. While the Americans will manage the central zone — the former Saddam bastion — the British and the Poles will take care of the south and the north respectively. The most troublesome part will be managed by the British, because the south has a Shia population which after decades of persecution has begun to assert itself. The Poles should have no problems, because the Kurds are unlikely to be a source of trouble for a European force. The centre with Baghdad and Tikrit will be the American zone. Yet, despite this division, America will be the de facto paramount power, because Gen. Tommy Franks will be the overall commander of all allied troops, including the “stabilization force.” Besides, an American civilian, Paul Bremer, will head Iraq’s interim administration.
What is questionable about America’s “stabilization plan” is its highly exclusionary character. First, Washington has made it clear the United Nations has no significant role to play in Iraq except in terms of humanitarian assistance. Besides, Europe’s “anti-war” group has been excluded from any role in post-war Iraq. In fact, at the recent London talks, where the stabilization plan was worked out, France, Germany and Russia were not even invited. As for the choice of Poland as the third coalition partner, Warsaw has no experience of dealing with the Middle East. Essentially, Poland has been chosen as a snub for France and Germany for their opposition to the Iraq war. In American eyes, this will give a boost to what Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld calls “new Europe.” As for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, while it will, no doubt, have an umbrella role, to keep France out, the final authority will rest with Nato’s defence planning committee, of which Paris is not a member.
No plan is yet available about how long America will stay in Iraq and when the people of Iraq will have a government of their own. Looting has stopped, but a centralized administrative structure commanding the people’s obedience is not yet in place. The Shias in the south are restless and want their due share in the new post-Saddam Iraq. In the north, the Kurds seem to have reconciled themselves to the unity and integrity of the Iraqi state. What suits them and Iraq’s neighbours is a new constitutional order in which they will be treated as equal citizens with their cultural and economic rights guaranteed and protected. The real problem is how to manage the transition. The exclusion of France, Germany and Russia from any say in post-war Iraq and the relegation of the UN to an insignificant role are bound to cause strong misgivings. Undeniably, the Iraqi people are not yet ready for elections and democracy. What they want in the interim is an administration which could restore law and order, put a government machinery in place, and provide the basic conditions in which normal life could be carried on. But such an interim administration must basically be an Iraqi set-up, and it must be run by local Iraqis and not by former exiles foisted on the people from outside.
THE US decision to withdraw most of its troops from Saudi Arabia is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the region. Washington and Riyadh were keen to stress that the step was taken by mutual agreement and does not represent any downgrading of ties. US troops have been stationed in the Kingdom since the Gulf war of 1991. The number of troops doubled to 10,000 during the recent campaign in Iraq but the Saudis refused to allow the US to launch air strikes from its bases. Both sides seem to have agreed that the political costs of keeping American soldiers on Saudi soil were far too high. The US troops will now be based in Qatar, which the Americans consider a more congenial location. There has been a steady deterioration in the traditionally close ties between Washington and Riyadh since September 11. At least 15 of the 19 pilots manning the planes that crashed into the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon were Saudi nationals. The Americans were alarmed by this fact and began to pressure the Saudis to mount a crackdown on such elements and speed up the process of democratic reforms. The Saudi kingdom was in no mood to take on the militants, fearing a domestic backlash.
There were also growing tensions over US policy towards the Palestinians and its indulgent attitude towards Israel. The invasion of Afghanistan followed by the attack on Iraq put further strains on relations between the two countries. The presence of foreign troops in a country where Islam’s holiest shrines are located was a powerful symbol of Muslim impotence that fuelled the fury of extremist groups opposed to the Saudi monarchy. The US pullout is likely to ease the pressure from radical groups on Riyadh and pave the way for democratic reforms. With US troops stationed on Saudi soil, any step towards political reform would have been seen as being the result of US pressure. While there are those who fear that the Saudis will now steadily lose their clout with the Americans, there are others who think this will not happen. After all, Saudi Arabia is the largest exporter of oil to the US and remains a powerful voice of moderation in the Middle East.
THE good news from Cyprus is that the ethnic wall separating the northern Turkish-speaking part of the island from the Greek-speaking region may soon be coming down. Recent days have seen a wave of rich Greek Cypriots cross over to the Turkish side, just to be where many of them have dreaded setting foot since 1974 when the island was divided between two antagonistic sectors. The CIA-sponsored coup back then, which put the Greek Cypriot army in charge of the island, forced a Turkish invasion of Cyprus to protect the Turkish minority there. Alienation has since intensified dividing Nicosia virtually into two watertight compartments. The UN-sponsored negotiations between the two sides failed last month to reunite the divided island, but succeeded in opening up the borders encouraging people-to-people contacts for the first time in 29 years.
The surge of Greek Cypriot ‘tourists’ comprising mainly the one-time residents of what is now Turkish-speaking Cyprus, is seen as a new economic lifeline for the battered Turk Cypriot economy. The opening of borders has also encouraged the Turk Cypriots to explore opportunities in a more lucrative Greek Cypriot job market. This comes as a much-needed respite for the former among whom unemployment runs as high as 40 per cent. The goodwill generated by the recent people-to-people contacts is the result of the prospect of Cyprus joining the European Union next year. This is a message that the political leadership on both sides will find it hard to ignore. The reunification of Cyprus — if it can be brought about by striking an equitable deal giving the Turk Cypriots political representation proportionate to their population in a unified Cyprus — is in the interest of all parties concerned. Turk Cypriots and Turkey, both, stand to gain much more than their Greek counterparts from such a deal. It will open doors of economic opportunities for the Turk Cypriots, and remove a major stumbling block in the way of Turkey’s entry into the EU.