US dictates are ruining the chances of Iraq's interim government to restore peace in Iraq, writes Nadhim Abdel-Wahed Al-Jasur* Before members of the Interim Governing Council (IGC) packed up and left the new "sovereign" government in charge, they issued an addendum to the Law of the Administration of the State. The addendum states that, ahead of the scheduled January 2005 elections, the country should focus on developing security, stability, and democracy. Indeed, security, as enshrined by the Law of National Safety, is a top priority for Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's government. While it contains guarantees concerning human rights, the law also views all acts of resistance to the occupation forces -- now called multinational forces -- as acts of terror. This is a classic case of catch-22. Initially, the Allawi government managed to reassure the Iraqis to a degree. It clamped down on organised crime, abduction and robbery. It arrested dozens, even hundreds, of criminals. Citizens have on the whole felt that security has improved, with police patrols roaming the streets and detaining suspects. The economic situation also improved, with business continuing as normal and trade routes opened between the capital and the provinces. For a while, residents of Baghdad could go out for walks, frequent riverfront cafes, and visit the elegant restaurants in Al- Mansur, Al-Azamia and Arsat Al- Hindia. On a diplomatic level, Allawi and his top aides toured neighbouring states and key Arab countries such as Egypt and the United Arab Emirates, in an attempt to rehabilite the Iraq's regional standing. Some neighbours promised to help with the security and economic situation. Saudi Arabia, for one, promised Iraq $1 billion in aid. However, electricity still went out for hours at a time, in a summer with temperatures hitting 50 Celsius, but the Iraqis did not complain. Then August came, bringing along a heat wave rendered more unbearable by the outbreak of violence escalating to new heights. The fighting erupted when Najaf -- and indeed the entire country -- woke up to the scene of Iraqi government forces, backed by the US occupation army, surrounding the house of Moqtada Al-Sadr, who had already declared his support for Allawi's government. The crisis seemed to be heading towards a solution at first, but then things got out of hand with the abduction of several Iraqi policemen by the Mahdi Army. Firefights and skirmishes ensued, developing into a full scale confrontation, with US bombers strafing the positions and offices of the Mahdi Army. Meanwhile, Ayatollah Al-Sayyid Ali Al-Sistani was on his way to London for treatment of a heart condition. He made a stopover in Beirut to confer with Nabih Berri, speaker of the Lebanese Parliament, and well known for his close ties with Tehran. Some speculate that a message of warning has been conveyed to Tehran, to the effect that it should stop interfering in Iraqi internal affairs, or face the consequences. The Iraqi defence minister made this point more than once since. Violence spread in Najaf, and from there to various southern provinces. It also erupted in Sadr City, the Mahdi Army leader's Baghdad stronghold, and where most of the Mahdi Army supporters live. Baghdad collapsed back into the turmoil it witnessed in spring 2003. Members of the Mahdi Army seized control of large stretches of the capital, including police stations and public squares. Any trace of government control subsided. Even US forces reduced their presence except in specific areas. Meanwhile, fighter-bombers and helicopter gun ships took to attacking neighbourhoods from afar, inflicting casualties at random. Once again, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has continued to pursue a misguided policy of aggression against the Iraqis. Having failed in Fallujah, he is now trying his luck in Najaf, a city known for its rebellion against British occupation in 1920. But the iron fist policy is a dead end. Military violence will spawn nothing but anger, revenge and hate. This is particularly true for underprivileged Iraqis, the ones who have suffered much in the past and have continued to suffer both during and after the US invasion. The occupation forces have stepped into a quagmire of which they are unlikely to emerge unscathed. Meanwhile, the peace and security that the people want, and the peace and security that the Allawi government says it wants to establish, are rapidly fading away. The reason, let's face it once and for all, is that US dictates overrule the aspirations of the Allawi government. * The writer is dean of the Higher Institute for Political and International Studies at Al-Mustansariya University.
