Arabs should prepare for the shockwaves that would follow from a partial or full US withdrawal from Iraq, the latter of which appears inexorable, writes Amin Howeidi* In my last article I discussed Iran, still a major flashpoint in the region. Today, I turn my attention to Iraq and to the evident failure of crisis management in this country. For starters, allow me to say that crisis management is an art that depends on the skills of those handling the crisis. The aim of crisis management is to prevent open hostilities through mutual concessions. The Iraq crisis, which started years ago, was a classic example of the failure of crisis management. This failure led to a direct confrontation between regular US troops and irregular Iraqi ones. Things got so out of hand in Iraq that at present no one knows when or how it will all end. All the players are caught up in a trap and no one can find the way out. At least one key to the solution is in Tehran, and this is partly why the Americans are putting all the pressure they can on the Iranians. They feign worry about the Iranian nuclear programme, but their real goal is to get the Iranians to help them out in Iraq. False assumptions can lead to disastrous conclusions. President Bush invaded Iraq ostensibly to get rid of weapons of mass destruction, which the country never had. His real motive, however, was to destroy the Iraqi military as a favour to Israel, the country that polices the region on behalf of the Americans. The Americans used Iraq as a whipping boy, an example to other countries that dare to challenge US policy. When President Bush was preparing for the invasion of Iraq, he expected the invasion to be concluded without resistance. He was just as right as Theodor Herzl was when he said that European Jews would settle in a country with no people. Contrary to Bush's expectations, the Iraqis fought back, inflicting tremendous losses on the Americans. In Herzl's case, the Palestinians also fought back. They resisted the Zionist invasion, and are still resisting it, with rifles, rocks, human bombs, and homemade rockets. Instead of discouraging terror, Bush actively promoted it. And his use of mercenaries, such as the contractors Blackwater, into the country only compounded the ordeal. Now Bush cannot find a face-saving way out of Iraq. He cannot stay, although he would love to, because of domestic opposition. The wives and children of US combatants, their parents, relatives and friends are all demanding an end to the Iraq misadventure. The expense of the war alone has prompted Congress, both democrats and republicans, to step up debate on Iraq. Now both US political and military leaders want to bring the troops home. But how? American officials keep discussing partial withdrawal and reduced presence, but the question of full withdrawal is never discussed. All we hear are plans for partial withdrawal, often with the option of keeping some troops in Iraq indefinitely. This is not going to solve the problem. Keeping smaller numbers of troops would make them more vulnerable to attack. At one point, more troops would have to be sent in again, especially in circumstances of political instability. Half measures can prove just as bad as doing nothing. Now let me ask you this: what would happen in the region were the Americans to pull out? Already, some Iraqi leaders have called on US troops to stay indefinitely for fear of civil war. Israel has similar worries. According to Yediot Aharonot, Israeli officials, including Defence Minister Ehud Barak, are concerned that Islamists would see withdrawal as a defeat of the Americans and use it to destabilise moderate regimes. Militiamen coming from Iraq may infiltrate Jordan. Syria and Iraq may once again serve as launching pads for Palestinian resistance groups and Hizbullah. Iran would push on with its nuclear programme. And the financial cost for both Israel and Saudi Arabia would be immense. In anticipation of a withdrawal, the US is already increasing its military assistance to Israel and selling more weapons to the Saudis. By starting a war and failing to end it, President Bush has endangered the entire region. A US withdrawal would send powerful shockwaves across the region. This much is evident. Have we prepared ourselves for those shockwaves? Have we discussed our plans in reaction to US partial or full withdrawal? And have we agreed on what to do if the Americans decide to keep all or some of their troops in Iraq? I certainly hope that our leaders have weighed their options. I certainly hope that we have an answer to current attempts to divide Iraq, Lebanon or Sudan. Better still, why cannot we take the initiative on any or all of those issues? It is always better to act than to react. * The writer is former defence minister and chief of General Intelligence.
