Five years after the US invaded and occupied Iraq it is time to address the question of whether the US succeeded or failed in its adventure. Have the neo-cons, led by President George Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney, succeeded in implementing their agenda in Iraq, the Middle East and, by extension, the world? And what have the political, economic, social and ethical repercussions of the war been for the US? To answer these questions we must consider the long-term global strategy of the US. Some things are important to ordinary Americans, regardless of what government is in power. These include taxes, social security, education, employment, housing and healthcare. In foreign policy matters US governments tend to come up with a new approach every now and then, the neo-cons being the latest example. Since World War II, Western and US strategy has been based on two premises. One was to support Israel and provide it with all the political, military, economic and security assistance it needed. Israel's expansionist, colonial and racist schemes have enjoyed the undiminished support of the West at the expense of the national rights of the Palestinians and other Arab states. The West did everything it could to guarantee Israel's domination of the Middle East at large. Israel reciprocated by serving as a bastion for Western interests in general, and US interests in particular. The ideological and religious affinity that the religious right and the neo-cons felt towards Israel only amplified an older trend, as President Bush noted on more than one occasion. The other premise was to control Middle East oil and its supply lines to the West. In order to achieve this goal the US ignored UN Security Council Resolution 1331, which called for the return of international inspectors to Iraq. Instead, the US and UK invaded, despite the opposition of international opinion and most members of the UN. Millions took to the streets in the US, Europe and other parts of the world. They did so not to defend Iraq's dictatorial regime but to protest against an illegitimate war that was clearly imperialist in motivation. Undaunted by the protests, President George Bush and his neo-con clique pushed on with their military agenda. The US administration thought that given the overwhelming superiority of its war machine the war would be short and easy. The Iraqi people would receive US troops as liberators and greet them with roses. The war was supposed to cost $50-60 billion, part of which was to be covered by allied and friendly nations. The rest would be a small price to pay for controlling Iraq's oil, as Cheney put it. Most Iraqis were relieved to see Saddam Hussein's regime removed. But they did not welcome occupation forces with flowers, nor did their life improve thereafter. Since the first day of the occupation US policies have amplified the suffering of Iraqis and fuelled ethnic tensions to the point where sectarianism now threatens the existence of Iraq. The war was devastating for the region. And yet the occupation of Iraq gave Israel and the neo-cons something they always wanted. It took Iraq, a rich and powerful country regardless of who was in power, out of the Middle East conflict. At 115 billion barrels, Iraq has the second largest oil reserve in the world. By controlling these resources the US ensured its status as the world's unchallenged superpower. For now the US is ahead of the oil game, keeping other international hopefuls -- the EU, Japan, China, etc -- at bay. But do the policies of the current US administration match the interests of the American people or are they designed solely for the benefit of the oil cartel, the military-industrial complex and the multinational corporations? And how exactly are current US economic woes related to the war in Iraq? The answer to such questions may decide the winner of the next US presidential elections. They may also determine the fate not just of the US but the world.
