 | To Our Readers |
Has something you've read here startled you? Are you angry, excited, puzzled or pleased? Do you have ideas to improve our coverage? |
What if, as Washington would have us believe, fresh discoveries are about to be made by weapons inspectors? In fact, even without them, as U.S. Ambassador to Russia Alexander Vershbow recently stated, the United States will present inspectors and the international community with irrefutable evidence of Baghdad's mendacity. If that happens, then it is quite possible that the Security Council will approve a second resolution sanctioning the use of military force against Iraq. How will Moscow vote if it comes to that?
Russia is in a tricky situation. As on the eve of the first Gulf War, when Yevgeny Primakov visited Baghdad immediately before the U.S.-led invasion, Moscow is currently looking at possibilities for "last-minute mediation" -- first and foremost in order to safeguard its economic interests in the region.
Two weeks ago, a delegation including Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Saltanov and top managers from oil companies LUKoil and Zarubezhneft descended on Baghdad. After that, Iraq awarded several new contracts to Russian oil companies, and it seems that the LUKoil contract to develop the West Qurna oil field may now have been restored. In a week's time, a State Duma delegation is to visit Baghdad.
Blix's report to the UN Security Council on Jan. 27 is likely to be crucial to Iraq's fate. Following presentation of the report, it is perfectly possible that the Bush administration will commence military operations in the first half of February.
The United States has three alternative options -- to postpone war until fall 2003, to organize a "palace coup" against Saddam Hussein with the help of U.S. special forces or to force the Iraqi leader into exile -- although these are considered less likely than an invasion.
However, the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush has yet to make its final decision. In the meantime, it is keeping up pressure on members of the UN Security Council by threatening to circumvent the United Nations if approval is not forthcoming.
Despite the uncompromising public rhetoric used by members of the U.S. administration vis-a-vis Hussein, at a more informal level there have been a number of indications that the administration still hopes for a "bloodless" solution. Recently, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld openly supported the idea of Hussein going into exile outside of Iraq -- moreover, apparently with guarantees of immunity from subsequent prosecution (although such guarantees have not been forthcoming from Bush himself).
It is still to early to talk of military action as the only remaining option. According to press reports, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have been looking into the possibility of persuading Hussein to go into exile (the countries most frequently mentioned in this respect are Egypt, Syria, Libya and even Russia) or of a palace coup by members of his inner circle. With this in mind, Saudi Arabia is said to be preparing an appeal to Security Council members to adopt a resolution on exonerating all Iraqi officials, with the exception of a dozen of Hussein's closest circle.
The only option the Bush administration is really ruling is the postponement of decisive action (Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, have talked of the need to extend the inspection mission for at least another 10 months). U.S. National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, in a recent op-ed in The New York Times, stressed that time is running out for Iraq. The latest date for launching an invasion of Iraq is February or March in order to complete the operation before the heat sets in late April. Failure by the Bush administration to act within this time frame would be extremely damaging to the White House, discrediting its whole "war on international terrorism." In addition, failure to overthrow Hussein would be portrayed by Iraqi propaganda as a personal victory for the Iraqi leader and make him a figurehead for radicals in the Middle East, as well as a magnet for extremist forces.
Another factor pushing Bush toward a war in February or March is the falling support in the United States for war on Iraq. In the last half year, support has dropped by a third and now only 53 percent of the population are in favor of war, with 37 percent opposed. Furthermore, Bush's rating fell below the 60 percent level for the first time in mid-January. The White House believes that decisive action on Iraq will be able to halt or reverse this trend.
Washington's increasingly blatant wager on the use of force has provoked a mixed reaction from its allies. West European leaders find themselves in a tricky situation: On the one hand, they cannot ignore growing domestic opposition to war; but on the other hand, they are worried about loss of geopolitical influence in general, and in particular in a "post-Saddam" Iraq.
At the beginning of January, a paradoxical situation arose: While the United States' most dependable ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, was trying -- under pressure from his own party -- to soften his line on Iraq, suggesting extending the inspection mission for another six months, French President Jacques Chirac was underlining his willingness to send a number of battleships to the Persian Gulf. The two main reasons for him doing this were to avoid undermining North Atlantic solidarity and to avert the possibility of a U.S.-British coalition dominating the Middle East.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schr?der also stated his intention to provide military support. It was only toward mid-January that Chirac and Schr?der changed their positions, stating that they would not support a UN resolution sanctioning war on Iraq. Their joint statement was interpreted in Washington as a direct challenge to the United States -- Rumsfeld even talked about a crisis in relations between the United States and "Old Europe."
Moscow's position has been more consistent: After a series of statements criticizing Baghdad's treatment of LUKoil, the Foreign Ministry has largely limited itself to formal statements about Russia's striving for a peaceful resolution to the conflict. And while it has expressed solidarity with the French and German position, it has made it clear that it will not veto a U.S.-backed Security Council resolution.
The Russian delegation that went to Baghdad to discuss various economic issues reiterated Moscow's unswerving commitment to commercial projects in Iraq. Indeed, Russia's economic interests in the region are expanding. For example, pipeline builder Stroitransgaz recently became one of the first Russian companies to be allowed to participate in commercial tenders in Saudi Arabia; and the Blue Stream gas pipeline from Russia to Turkey is to be officially launched in the next couple of weeks.
Russia's interests can only be realized if there is stability in the Middle East -- thus its attempts at "last-minute mediation." It remains to be seen what effect they will have.
Alexander Shumilin is director of the Center for Analysis of Conflicts in the Middle East and editor of Mideast.ru. He contributed this comment to The Moscow Times.
A Message from The Moscow Times:
Dear readers,
We are facing unprecedented challenges. Russia's Prosecutor General's Office has designated The Moscow Times as an "undesirable" organization, criminalizing our work and putting our staff at risk of prosecution. This follows our earlier unjust labeling as a "foreign agent."
These actions are direct attempts to silence independent journalism in Russia. The authorities claim our work "discredits the decisions of the Russian leadership." We see things differently: we strive to provide accurate, unbiased reporting on Russia.
We, the journalists of The Moscow Times, refuse to be silenced. But to continue our work, we need your help.
Your support, no matter how small, makes a world of difference. If you can, please support us monthly starting from just $2. It's quick to set up, and every contribution makes a significant impact.
By supporting The Moscow Times, you're defending open, independent journalism in the face of repression. Thank you for standing with us.
Not ready to support today?
Remind me later.
Remind me later.
×
Remind me next month
Thank you! Your reminder is set.
We will send you one reminder email a month from now. For details on the personal data we collect and how it is used, please see our Privacy Policy.