Lamis Andoni on the campaign at home to prepare for America's war on Iraq Although the world may be awaiting the report on the status of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by the UN inspection team, believing that the Gulf country's destiny is linked to the document, the US appears to have another agenda. Statements and threats by American officials suggest that President George W Bush's administration may be seeking an excuse for war. While Washington says that its plans hinge on the outcome of the UN report, its actions and statements signal that the countdown to war has actually begun. Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld said Washington was looking for a "pattern" of Iraqi violations that amount to a "material breach" of the UN resolution. Rumsfeld's comments not only imply that the US may unilaterally reach such a conclusion -- perhaps even before the inspection team submits its report -- but that it might find other pretexts to launch an offensive. In statements he made in Santiago, Chile, Rumsfeld warned that Iraq's firing on American aircraft policing the no-fly zones "could spark an invasion". White House officials elaborated on Rumsfeld's statements, saying that by firing on US aircraft, Iraq had committed a "material breach" of the latest UN resolution. However, officials stopped short of pronouncing it a reason to declare war. The no-fly zones in northern and southern Iraq were imposed by the US and Britain without a UN mandate and, consequently, neither resolution 1441 nor any of the other UN resolutions have any bearing on Iraqi actions against British and American fighters. But these facts are conveniently omitted in a misleading conflation of the no-fly zones issue with that of Iraqi compliance with inspections. Many pundits have been parroting the "material breach" charges, advertently or inadvertently, taking part in a government-inspired disinformation campaign. There are clear psychological dimensions to this campaign. It aims to undercut and delegitimise dissent at home, pressure Arab governments as well as those of Turkey and Iran to aid its war efforts, and demoralise the Iraqi army so as to provoke a military coup or an assassination of President Saddam Hussein. Leaked reports to the press talk about final steps "to lay the foundation for action in Iraq" that reflect a high level of preparedness and downplay objections by Arab governments and Turkey to the war effort. In a lengthy report published in the New York Times on 17 November, American officials claimed that Washington has "private assurances" from all key regional allies to provide assistance and rights to use military bases, but that the understandings need to be "formalised". Officials, however, admitted they are still negotiating with various governments in the region who have put forward demands to guarantee their stability and interests when the war starts to impact on the region. The report quoted military officials as saying, "the portion of the 250,000 troops needed to begin 'the rolling start' for air, land and sea attacks could be in place within one month of an executive presidential order." Rumsfeld himself called the build up in the region around Iraq a "big psychological operation itself". On the home front, the government is mounting another kind of psychological campaign to assure the American people of international community's support for America's war plans. At the same time, it is stirring up fear among the public and taking measures to curb dissent and marginalise critics. In a set back for civil liberties, and consequently the anti-war movement in the US, an appeals court upheld intrusive wire tapping and surveillance of "suspected terrorists". Civil liberties' advocates warn that the new decree would undermine freedom of speech, thus intimidating critics of the war and American foreign policy. The Justice Department has also announced that all Iraqis, including Americans of Iraqi descent, have been placed under strict surveillance -- a move reminiscent of the internment of Japanese Americans following Pearl Harbor. Officials argue that the current measure was necessary "to protect Americans from Saddam's potential agents". Neither officials nor mainstream media commentators have noted the irony of "criminalising the Iraqi community", as critics of the measures charge, while at the same time going to war "to liberate the Iraqi people". There are also signs that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), in coordination with the Immigration and Naturalisation Department, has started targeting Arab members of the anti-war movement. Amer Jibran, an outspoken Palestinian activist, was arrested at his home in Providence Island earlier this month on vague charges "of immigration law violations". Thousands of Arabs, Muslims, Mexicans, Filipinos and others have been detained and even deported without court hearings. But Jibran's arrest marked the first detention of a well-known secular activist involved in the largest American anti-war coalition. But these measures are, on their own, insufficient to shore up sustained support for a war effort. For while the majority of Americans, at least according to polls, support President Bush, most prefer that the US does not do it alone. Therefore, war preparations have been accompanied by a campaign, mostly by right-wing think tanks and columnists, to discredit the UN and even Chief Inspector Hans Blix. An article distributed by the powerful Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neo--conservative and Zionist coalition that advocates regime change across the Arab world and in Iran, claimed that Blix was "a compromise choice" to appease Saddam Hussein. The PNAC report was echoed by American officials who told USA Today and other newspapers that the former Swedish foreign minister was not "tough enough for the job". Blix has publicly differed with Bush on incidents of omissions and obstructions that should be reported by the inspection team as instances of 'serious' Iraqi non--compliance with the UN resolution. In its rush to gear up for war, Washington is impatient with the very resolution that was drafted to give it the flimsiest pretexts for war. "[The resolution] has components that are simply geared toward Mr Bush's war," commented Dennis Halliday, former head of the UN's oil-for-food programme, who resigned in protest against the sanctions. "If the Iraqis close the door on an inspector in a bike shop at three in the morning, that could be used as a pretext -- as being in 'material breach' for war", said Halliday. But Rumsfeld, as his statements indicate, will be looking for "material breaches" in every Iraqi move. Related stories: The wait before the war Inspections begin Whither Arab independence? No spying this time A pretext for war? 14 - 20 November 2002 UNSC Resolution 1441 Related links: United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) UN Security Council (UNSC) United Nations (UN) The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
