|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Middle
East
Middle Eastern regimes line up behind US military crackdown
in Baghdad and Basra
By Peter Symonds
24 April 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Tuesdays international conference on Iraq has highlighted
the venal character of all the Middle Eastern regimes in tacitly
endorsing Washingtons neo-colonial occupation. Despite their
occasional criticisms of the quagmire in Iraq and, in the case
of Syria and Iran, pro forma calls for the withdrawal of foreign
troops, the foreign ministers of Iraqs neighbours, along
with Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf States, all dutifully turned up
at the summit in Kuwait to discuss stabilising US-occupied Iraq.
The gathering took place as US and Iraqi troops tightened the
siege of the huge, working class slums of Sadr City in Baghdad.
Hundreds of people have been killed and many more have been injured
in fighting over the past month that began with an offensive against
the Mahdi Army militia of Moqtada al-Sadr in the southern port
city of Basra. In Sadr City, home to more than two million urban
poor, the basic services have collapsed. Food and medicine are
in short supply. Residents remain huddled in their homes, fearful
of being caught in crossfire or being struck by US missiles and
bombs if they venture out.
Far from condemning these latest crimes, the foreign ministers
met to discuss American demands that neighbouring Arab states
give more political support to its puppet government in Baghdad
by reopening their embassies and providing debt relief. US Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice made similar demands on Monday at a
separate meeting of Washingtons regional allies, held in
Bahrain under the auspices of the Gulf Cooperation Council. Rices
message to Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the Gulf States was
that they had to do more to counter Iranian influence inside Iraq
and across the region.
These Sunni-dominated Arab states have previously been critical
of the US-backed Iraqi regime, which rests on Shiite Islamist
parties with longstanding ties to Iran and has been accused of
sectarian discrimination against Iraqs Sunni minority. Rice
told a press conference in Baghdad on Monday before heading to
Bahrain and Kuwait: I think its extremely important that
Iraqs neighbors, who have been saying that the government
needs to behave in a nonsectarian fashion and go after Shia militia,
takes note of the fact that that is precisely what has happened
in Basra.
In other words, Americas regional allies should be reassured
by the savage crackdown on the Shiite Mahdi Army that Iraqi Prime
Minister Nouri al-Maliki would suppress all opposition to the
US occupation. Inside Iraq, the US and Iraqi operations in Basra
and Baghdad have been backed not only by Malikis Dawa
Party, the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq (ISCI) and their Kurdish
nationalist allies, but also by the main Sunni parliamentary bloc,
which is in negotiations to rejoin the government.
All those present at the Kuwait meeting backed the military
operations in Basra and Baghdad. The final statement praised
the role of Iraqi security forces in the face of threats
and welcomed the governments commitment to dismantle
and disarm all militias and armed groups. The UN and permanent
Security Council membersRussia, China, France and Britain
along with the US, were also represented at the summit and gave
their backing to the crackdown.
The claim that the Iraqi government is aiming to disarm
all militias is simply a lie. The US and Iraqi military
is targetting the Mahdi Army because of its hostility to the US
occupation and the governments plans to open up the countrys
southern oil fields to foreign investment. Other parties have
been allowed to maintain armed groups. For months, ISCI and its
militia, the Badr Organisation, have been waging a vicious campaign
against the Sadrists for the domination of southern cities in
preparation for provincial elections in October.
While the gatherings in Bahrain and Kuwait were held behind
closed doors, there is no doubt that all the autocratic regional
governments were encouraged by the crackdown in Basra and Baghdad.
Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States have been particularly concerned
that unrest among the working class and urban poor in Iraqs
largely Shiite south would spark opposition among the sizable,
persecuted Shiite communities in their own countries. After the
meeting in Bahrain, the countrys foreign minister commented
that Arab diplomats had questions about the ambiguity of
the political picture in Iraq and received a very
good explanation from US Secretary of State Rice and Iraqi
Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari.
Speaking alongside Rice, Zebari told a press conference in
Kuwait that there was a new mood in the Arab world and in
the region that this new Iraqi government is here to stay.
Both played up the fact that Iraq was now to be a regular invitee
to Gulf Cooperation Council meetings and that the next conference
on Iraqi security would be held in Baghdad. Rice stressed that
it had been a very good couple of days for Iraq... being
integrated into particularly the Arab neighbourhood.
Continuing tensions
Despite the upbeat tone, there was no disguising the fact that
the Arab world has offered the Iraqi government only
token gestures. Using lack of security as an excuse, Iraqs
Sunni Arab neighbours have shut their embassies in Baghdad and
have no concrete plans to reopen them. Moreover, while US demands
for debt relief were discussed at the meetings, no firm commitments
were announced. While some of Iraqs debt has been wiped
clean over the past three years, an estimated $US57-80 billion
remains, the bulk of which is owed to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf
States.
A sizable portion of Iraqs debt stems from the Iran-Iraq
war in the 1980s, when Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, horrified
by overthrow of Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1979, backed Iraq in the
protracted conflict. By overthrowing Saddam Hussein, the US-led
invasion of Iraq in 2003 profoundly destabilised Middle Eastern
relations. The Sunni Arab states, which had regarded
the Baathist regime in Baghdad as a bulwark against the Shiite
regime in Persian Iran, have been deeply hostile to
the emergence of Malikis Shiite-dominated government.
Washingtons allies in the Middle East have maintained
their distance from the Iraqi regime for two reasons: firstly,
because the US occupation is deeply unpopular throughout the region,
and secondly, because significant layers of the regions
Sunni ruling elites regard Maliki as an Iranian stoogepart
of an emerging Shiite crescent throughout the region.
Tensions erupted in a sharp exchange inside the Kuwait meeting
when Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal declared:
Iranian meddling in Iraq is obvious, and the solution to
Iraqs security problems is in the hands of the Iranians.
Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki shot back: Is
this a comment or an accusation?
The Bush administration has sought to manipulate these tensions
to line up its Middle Eastern allies against Iran. The White House
has continued to ramp up unsubstantiated accusations that Tehran
is supplying and training anti-occupation insurgents inside Iraq
and is planning to build nuclear weapons as pretexts for a military
strike on Iran. Washingtons reliance on a regime in Iraq
with close political and historic ties to Iran only underscores
the incoherent and reckless character of US foreign policy. While
deeply suspicious of the Maliki government and hostile to Iran,
Saudi Arabia and other Arab states are wary about backing US threats
of a war that could make them the target of Iranian reprisals.
Irans presence at the Kuwait meeting highlights its political
accommodation to the US occupation of Iraq. While Iran and ally
Syria made muted calls for the withdrawal of foreign troops, their
concern is not for the suffering of the Iraqi people. Iran and
Syria supported the meetings final statement backing the
Maliki governments crackdown in Basra and Baghdad. Last
weekend, Irans ambassador to Iraq, Hassan Kazemi Qumi, spelled
out Tehrans full support for the Basra offensive. While
criticising US operations in Sadr City, he praised the Iraqi governments
decision to fight outlaws, declaring it was
able to achieve a positive result in Basra.
The attempt to draw a distinction between the military operations
in Basra and Baghdad is absurd. Despite efforts to portray the
Basra offensive as an all-Iraqi affair, the operation was based
on US plans and was supported to the hilt by American and British
advisers, air power, artillery, intelligence and logistical support.
Tehran is particularly concerned to oust the Sadrists from Basra
as they represent an obstacle to ISCIs plans to develop
an autonomous Shiite region along the lines of the Kurdish regional
government in the north.
Tehrans calls for US troops to leave are based on the
calculation that Irans interests would be enhanced in Iraq,
particularly in the largely Shiite south. While mildly critical
of the US occupation, Irans Arab rivalsabove all Saudi
Arabiahave pressed the US to stay in Iraq as a guarantee
against growing Iranian influence. The last concern of any of
the regional powers, as they manoeuvre to protect their strategic
and economic interests, is the plight of the Iraqi people. In
fact, all these regimes are organically hostile to any social
unrest among layers of the working class, and thus come together
in their full support for the repression being meted out in Basra
and Baghdad by the US and Iraqi military.
See Also:
US military tightens siege of Sadr City
as cleric warns of war
[21 April 2008]
US and Iraqi military continue push into
Sadr City
[16 April 2008]
Bush orders Iraq escalation to continue
[11 April 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |