Readers who have been following the news may be aware that there is a war going on that has attracted some interest. They may also have noticed that there has been little if any comment on said war in my weblog. Well, it isn’t because I lack views – simply because like many people I suspect I have been having difficulty in weaving them together into a coherent position. Still, rather than stay silent I think I may as well put some of my own views down at this point, even though I am still conflicted… Apologies if I don’t put in links to support many of my assertions/beliefs – they are not that uncommon and I’m sure you can find appropriate links and information to back many of them up.

Why has America gone to war?

Because of a threat to its own security?

To my astonishment, a recent CNN poll shows more than half of Americans believe Saddam was responsible for the September 11th attacks. This is just the Big Lie in operation. Put Saddam and September 11th together in conversation frequently enough and people will come to believe there is an association.

Saddam probably does have some tenuous links to Al-Quaeda on the basis of “the enemy of my enemy…” but while he is a ruthless dictator he strikes me as pragmatic, not ideological. The WMDs he owns (or owned) were either for use against internal opponents or as a deterrent to attack. He wouldn’t use WMDs or foster terrorism unless it helped him to prop up his own power. His voiced support for Islamic terror seems to me likely to be simply an attempt to get allies in the Arab world.

Because of a threat to neighboring countries?

More plausible but still unconvincing. It’s true that Saddam invaded Kuwait but since then he has been effectively penned in. The indefinite presence of weapons inspectors would be enough to keep him from making more WMDs and he has learned from bitter experience that conventional military adventurism will be met by force. My guess is that if he had been left alone he would have been happy to stay on peaceful terms with his neighbors, only using his army to threaten his own people.

Because of concern for human rights in Iraq?

No doubt the US would rather Saddam behaved in a civilised fashion towards his own people, but since it was quite happy to turn a blind eye to his many misdoings as long as he was “our guy” and remains happy to ignore the misdoings of other client states around the world it seems pretty absurd to suggest the US really cares about Iraq… all of which leaves the inescapable conclusion:

Yes, this war is basically about oil.

And more broadly a desire to have a strong Western ally in the Middle East from which power can be projected into the rest of the region. This American Life laid out some of the arguments about that in this radio show and it has also been discussed in this New Yorker article.

So you oppose the war?

Well… no. Bush’s motives are dubious to say the least, but I am less interested in motives than I am in the results.

I would say there is a reasonably good chance that the dictator they eventually prop up in Baghdad will be better behaved than Saddam to his own people. And with a “friendly” regime in power the sanctions against Iraq can end and along with them the needless civilian suffering that has plagued the country for twelve years. Commentators have suggested that sanctions have cost the lives of 500,000 Iraqi children so far. It may be that Saddam is to blame for mal-distributing the resources that remain but since there is no other way to remove him than war this is irrelevant to the larger question. War may be bloody but continued sanctions appear to be much worse in terms of the number killed. And post September 11th there was little sign that the sanctions would be substantially lowered any time soon.

But the war is unjust!

Well, it’s abundantly clear to me that there is no “legal” justification for the US’ actions, and that they are transparently self-interested. But perhaps this is just as well. By making it abundantly clear that the US – at least this administration – doesn’t really give a damn about international law perhaps this latest fracas will give Europe the spur it needs to develop some significant independent military and foreign policy capability of its own so that the UN isn’t always subject to the whims of the US for enforcement of its goals.

What about the UN?

I suspect it will go on much as before. Nobody would really expect that it can act effectively restrain the US when it wants to do something. It may even be strengthened if anger at America translates into increased backing of the UN by other nations.

Will the war go well?

Yes, I think so – as well as you can expect from any war. I don’t expect much Iraqi resistance – certainly there is no reason to expect a “Stalingrad in Baghdad” situation. If it looks as if Saddam is doomed and if most of his henchmen are given to understand they will be left alone if they surrender (a reasonable assumption) I believe resistance will collapse.

What about after the war?

Well, this is where things will get really interesting. I (and another recent leftist commentator) fear that this has the potential to be a real problem for the left if (as I expect) the war is “won” – at least in the first few months. They have to try to ensure that the American public with its short attention span continues to pay attention to the fate of Iraq months after most of the American troops have gone home.

My guess is that things will turn out well as long as

1) The Kurds don’t press their (legitimate) desire for independence too hard prompting a brutal backlash from a US-backed regime and/or Turkey and
2) The US doesn’t throw its weight around too brazenly from its new base.

Will the war cause a wave of democratisation to spread across the Middle East?

I doubt it. That assumes that the new Iraqi regime will be democratic, which I doubt (because the US has little interest in making it so – a truly democratic regime with so many different interests would be chaotic and the US wants stability above all). Moreover, I don’t think the US would like to see an Islamic democracy in place in, say, Saudi Arabia – it would rather the same old stable despotic regimes stayed in place.

More thoughts later – meanwhile if you would like to dispute with me or get more detail on my views, comment with your thoughts – but please back them up with evidence…websites movie ratingsquirt movieant movies farm alienmovies dater easymovies lee pam and of tommyawards 2005 mtv moviehome naked moviesnasty movies bukkakenazi sex moviesnot another movie teen trailerskill credits acschedules academy casino busmillion 90 ringtonesaca international creditcasino adress inter90210 beverly hills ringtonefund benson credit acacia stevetechnologies advanced casino Map