| |
'Oil Lobby Determined to Have Its War' in Iraq
|
|
|
'Oil Lobby Determined to Have Its War' in Iraq
|
|
by Haroon Siddiqui
|
| |
|
HYDERABAD, India—With Canada, most of Europe and the entire Arab world wary of an American war on Iraq, let's turn to Asia for another perspective. To the world's largest democracy, India. To its highly respected former prime minister, Inder K. Gujral, easily the most thoughtful and moderate Indian leader since Jawaharlal Nehru. Five years after stepping down from office, he remains a popular speaker, from here to America, where his son lives. Gujral was in New York for the fall session of the United Nations as a member of the Indian delegation in the days leading up to the Nov. 8 resolution on Iraq, reconstituting the U.N. weapons inspection system. "It would be a great tragedy for the world if there was to be a war on Iraq," he said in an interview. "It would be particularly calamitous for our region. But the oil lobby in America is determined to have the war. "The main American aim seems to be to gain control of the world's second-largest oil reserves and to dictate the flow of oil to the world market. This has, in fact, long been the objective of American diplomacy in oil-rich West Asia." Gujral recalled a 1990 meeting he had as India's foreign minister with then-U.S. secretary of state James Baker. "He minced no words when he told me: `Mr. Minister, oil is our civilization and we will never permit any demon to sit over it.' That still seems to be the main objective of the American policy," the job having been left unfinished in the 1991 Gulf War. Gujral's views are widely shared here, even by the right-wing Hindu nationalist government, whose domestic hard-line religious views are anathema to him as a secular Hindu. The government of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, despite hitching itself to George W. Bush's war on terrorism, remains unpersuaded by the president's call to arms on Iraq. It subscribes to the view that a war on Iraq would dilute the war on terrorism. Gujral agrees, but his critique goes well beyond that. "Afghanistan is still unsettled. Al Qaeda is trying to recuperate elsewhere. That task should not be left unfinished. We cannot have attention and resolve diverted elsewhere. There is no credible evidence linking the Iraqi government in any way with the global terrorist's network. "The issue is not Saddam Hussein. He has done horrible things, but individuals are dispensable. The issue is Iraqi people, long suffering under economic sanctions. The issue is the American desire to control oil." The issue is also American unilateralism. America is, of course, "the pre-eminent power of this age. Its technology and economy dominate the world and its might is irresistible. There is also a strange helplessness on the part of other powers in the face of American domination. But the world, especially our region, is full of apprehension that this hyper-power would act unilaterally to impose its own form of global order and enforce its values in shaping the world to its own taste. "It is highly unacceptable at the beginning of the 21st century to have powerful outsiders decide which particular government is good and which one is bad. It would be a strange thing to have some powerful powers, sitting thousands of miles away, dictating what should happen in which country." Gujral believes the Bush administration's declared desire to dominate the world may not be good for America itself. "The world today is too complex, too volatile and too independent to be governed from a single center. Interventions in the name of peace and security will always require global solutions and global coalitions. Such co-operation would be impossible when a country chooses to operate beyond the pale of international law and sanctity.
"The only viable option, therefore, is a multi-polar world order. I believe that the principal center. of this order will be America, of course, and a newly assertive European Union, and resurgent Russia and Asia, particularly the rising economic powers of China and India. Consultation and co-operation among these powers will be central to maintaining the stability of this order."
Bush is working through the United Nations on Iraq, isn't he? Yes, says Gujral, but only to subvert it. "There's the ongoing Anglo-American campaign to build up a war psychosis without adducing any convincing material evidence against Iraq. As to weapons of mass destruction, this is best proven or disproven on the ground, now that international inspection teams are in Iraq and by all accounts are carrying out their tasks unhindered. "Yet America is trying to defeat the purpose of the U.N. inspection regime. I hope the inspectors will be allowed to complete their job and table their report. And I hope it is the United Nations which decides the merit of the report. Let the inspectors tell the world whether Saddam Hussein has or does not have weapons of mass destruction." Recalling the 1953 American-organized regime change in Iran after Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh nationalized the Iranian oil industry, Gujral noted that the event unleashed "ultra-nationalistic-cum-religious" forces, which culminated in the 1979 revolution. "I fear the emergence of similar intifada in the post-Saddam era." Haroon Siddiqui is The Star's editorial page editor emeritus. His column appears Sundays and Thursdays.
Copyright 1996-2003. Toronto Star Newspapers Limited
###
|
 Printer Friendly Version
E-Mail This Article
|
|
|
| |
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|
|
