|
Tuesday, 20 February 2007 16:51 |
By JIM GENARO
There are no easy answers to the problems of the Middle East, but some of the solutions offered by the Bush administration are fundamentally flawed, according to retired professor Tom Sanders, who addressed a forum on ìRethinking Middle East Policyî at UNC Ashevilleís Humanities Lecture Hall on Feb. 13.
The talk and the discussion that followed were sponsored by the World Affairs Council of Western North Carolina as part of its Great Decisions 2007 lecture series. More than 100 people attended the event.
| | Tom Sanders |
ìI
think that as one looks at it, one has the feeling that no matter what
one tries, it wonít work well,î Sanders told the audience.
He spent about
an hour outlining the major issues facing the region and the Bush
administrationís policies towards those issues, followed by a critique
of those policies.
Sanders began with Iraq.
ìPrinciple one of the presidentís Iraq policy is the so-called ësurge,íî Sanders said.
This involves a
temporary boost in troop levels with the purpose of reducing violence,
searching for weapons, arresting suspected insurgents and establishing
peace, he noted.
Furthermore, ìthis is not simply an American operation ó it will be an Iraqi operationî assisted by U.S. troops, Sanders added.
In this effort,
the U.S. and Iraqi forces face a diverse group of foes, including
predominantly Sunni insurgents, fundamentalist Muslims, former
Baathists, people motivated by revenge over killings of family members
and many fighters who ìsimply want American forces out,î he said.
The second
principle of the Bush administrationís policy is to promote national
reconciliation. ìThe design is to bring these conflicting groups
together,î Sanders said ó particularly Sunni and Shiite Muslims.
Thirdly, a new
push towards reconstruction is planned, with $1 billion in aid coming
from the U.S. and an additional $10 billion being spent by the Iraqi
government.
Finally, Bush
hopes to ìnudge (Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri) Maliki to take measures
against these so-called ëmilitiasíî that operate throughout much of the
country ó particularly in Shiite neighborhoods, Sanders said.
All of these strategies are based on two basic assumptions, he added.
The first is that ìthis will lead to victory ... Defeat is unacceptable to a great nation like the U.S.,î Sanders said.
Secondly, he
added, the Bush administration assumes that ìfailure would lead to
chaos ... The image of the U.S. as a responsible ally would be
undermined.î
Next, Sanders
turned his attention to the issue of Iran. The Bush administration is
seeking to confront Iran on a number of issues, particularly its
alleged development of nuclear weapons; its involvement in the affairs
of Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan; and its attempts ìto aggrandize
itself,î he said.
Iran is seeking
to establish itself as the leader of ìthe Shiite crescent,î a swath
across the Persian Gulf region that includes Syria, Lebanon and now
Iraq, Sanders told the audience.
To counter this
trend, the U.S. is encouraging an alliance of Sunni countries that are
friendly to the U.S. ó particularly Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia.
However, it is
also taking military precautions, building up naval forces in the
Persian Gulf, as well as working diplomatically toward a ìmobilization
of other countries to put pressure on Iran to change its policiesî ó
particularly its claim that it has the right to enrich uranium for
non-military purposes, Sanders said.
In Lebanon, the
U.S. finds itself allied with Israel in its support of the government
of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, in opposition to Hezbollah, Sanders
said. The latter is a militant Islamist political party with strong
influence in the Lebanese parliament ó but considered to be a terrorist
organization by the U.S. and Israel.
In the conflict
between Israel and the Palestinians, the U.S. is starting to get
involved in the peace process after a long hiatus, Sanders noted, with
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice planning to meet with leaders of
both sides in the coming weeks.
However, he added, such meetings have not yielded many positive results in the past.
ìThe question we have to ask is, ëIs this just rhetoric, or is there something going on behind this?íî Sanders said.
He then began an analysis and critique of the aforementioned Bush administration policies.
Regarding the
surge of forces in Iraq, he noted that the model for such a strategy is
the recently published counterinsurgency manual written by Gen. David
Petraeus, commander of the Multinational Force in Iraq.
However, Sanders
said, based on this manual, a decisive victory over Iraqi insurgents
would require a force of 150,000 troops ó far more than the number that
would be available even with the increased troop levels currently
proposed.
Furthermore, he
added, there is ìnot enough equipment to supply the American units that
are set to go in and the condition of the Iraqis is even more dubious.î
Sanders also
noted that the strategy only calls for an increased presence in Baghdad
and Al-Anbar province, ignoring many other parts of the country, such
as Narjaf and Karbala, where fighting is especially intense.
A third critique
of the surge policy is that the tactics involved actually promote
animosity towards U.S. troops and will likely rally support for the
insurgency, he said.
Particularly
troubling are the house-to-house searches that American troops conduct,
during which they typically kick in the front doors of peopleís homes
in the middle of the night, arrest the men and search the houses ó
including womenís quarters. This practice is considered extremely
invasive and offensive in Muslim culture, Sanders noted.
ìWhat it does is intensifies the already existent hostilities among the Iraqis towards these occupying forces,î he added.
He noted that
surveys have shown that 90 percent of Iraqis want the U.S. to leave and
about 75 percent say the American troops create more violence than they
solve.
As to the boost
in reconstruction efforts, Sanders said that the U.S. has already spent
$38 billion on reconstruction, but that ìmost of it has gone to
security and a lot of it ... has gone to corruption ó not just Iraqi,
but U.S.î corruption, as well.
He also
expressed doubts about the likelihood that Maliki would submit to U.S.
pressures to disband Shiite militias, noting that those militias are
actually the primary security forces in much of the country.
Reconciliation
is also highly challenging, Sanders said, because the various parties
are so fragmented that no one can speak on behalf of the Shiites or the
Sunnis. Even Ayatollah Sistani, once considered by many to be the moral
authority of the Shiites, is no longer listened to, he added.
Turning to his
critiques of the Bush policies towards Iran, Sanders noted that
attempts to keep the country out of Iraqís affairs are shortsighted.
ìOne thing
people donít realize is how close the Iraqi government it to the
government of Iran,î Sanders said. For instance, in a recent
much-publicized raid, U.S. troops arrested four Iranian officials who
were visiting Iraq, accusing them of supporting insurgents.
However, Sanders said, two of the men were there as official guests of the Iraqi government.
The U.S. has
made great efforts to alienate Iran, he added. After the U.S. ousted
the Taliban from Afghanistan, Iran ó a longtime opponent of the Taliban
ó offered assistance in reconstruction efforts, but was rejected by the
U.S., Sanders said.
Furthermore,
there is no evidence whatsoever that Iran is interested in developing
nuclear weapons, he told the audience. Tehran has repeatedly called for
a non-nuclear Middle East and has vowed that it does not wish to
acquire such weapons.
ìIran signed the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,î Sanders noted. ìUnder that treaty,
it has the right to enrich uraniumî for non-weapons purposes.
As for Lebanon,
Sanders said that the one thing people there want is for foreign
countries ó especially the U.S., Israel and Iran ó to stop meddling in
their affairs and for the U.S. to support its democratically elected
government, including Hezbollah.
Having critiqued the policies of the Bush administration, Sanders then offered some of his own suggestions for the region.
First, he said, the U.S. should begin a ìphased withdrawal from Iraq ó removing the troops within a particular time scheme.î
He noted that this idea is favored by most Americans and by the leading Democratic presidential candidates.
Without setting such a timetable, Iraqis have little incentive to step up their own security efforts, he argued.
ìAdopting this kind of policy would put pressure on Maliki to come through,î Sanders said.
He said that he
thinks, given such conditions, the Maliki government would manage to
assimilate power, though he conceded that ìit might not be pretty. It
might involve some killing ó it might also involve payoffs.î
Nonetheless, he noted that a heavy hand might be necessary to hold the country together.
Another crucial
element, Sanders said, is removing all U.S. military bases from Iraq.
He noted that the U.S. military presence is a source of great
antagonism to people in Iraq and elsewhere in the Muslim world.
The presence of
American army bases in Saudi Arabia is one of the primary reasons given
by Osama bin Ladin for why he launched his attacks on the U.S., Sanders
noted.
Another recommendation Sanders offered was that Iraq should be federalized ó divided into ethnically based provinces.
The most extreme
form of this, he noted, would be separating Iraq into three countries:
one Sunni, one Shiite and one Kurdish. But, he said, ìnobody really
wants that.î
Even the Kurds,
who enjoy a high degree of autonomy and consider themselves largely
independent from Iraq, know that if Kurdistan were granted autonomy,
ìthey would be attacked by Iran, Turkey and Syria,î all of which are
struggling to stifle the pleas for independence of their own Kurdish
populations.
Engaging Iran
directly is another important strategy for peace, Sanders said. Iran is
willing and even eager to work with the U.S. ó but only if it is
respected and not subjected to conditions such as abandoning its
domestic nuclear power program, he said.
Sanders noted that Iran even offered to cooperate with the U.S. during its invasion of Iraq.
ìThat idea was squelched by Vice President Cheney,î he added.
However, the
most positive action the U.S. could take in the Middle East would be a
serious engagement of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Sanders
told the audience.
ìUnquestionably,
the biggest mistake of the Bush administration was not to make an
effort to deal even-handedly with the Israel-Palestinian situation,î he
concluded.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
