Just as his father did, George W. Bush is offering generous packages of
aid and arms to nations that join his drive for war against Iraq. There
is so much bargaining going on that arms analyst Ira Shorr has called
the Administration's ad hoc alliance for war the "coalition of the
wanting." According to former Secretary of State James Baker, winning
support for the first Gulf War involved "cajoling, extracting,
threatening and occasionally buying votes." This time there is far more
buying and threatening than cajoling going on, and recruiting allies has
been far more costly.
Would-be allies are driving harder bargains because Gulf War II is a
much shakier proposition. As John Chipman of the International Institute
for Strategic Studies has observed, "Then it was straightforward. Eject
Iraq from Kuwait. Now it's 'regime change,' and that's...hard for many
to swallow." Bush officials are hoping that massive doses of US aid will
make unpopular anti-Iraq positions go down more easily. The
Administration is weighing proposals for nearly $30 billion worth of
grants and subsidized loans for allies concerned about the political and
economic side-effects of a new Gulf conflict.
Recipients of Administration largesse fit into two categories: (1)
countries in the region seeking to be reimbursed for the negative
impacts of the war, and (2) countries whose support is sought as a way
to legitimize the war in the eyes of a skeptical world. The biggest aid
deal is being offered to one of the former--Turkey. As this went to
press, the Turkish Parliament was considering a US offer of $15 billion
in aid--$5 billion in grants and $10 billion in guaranteed loans--in
exchange for Turkey's agreement to host 62,000 US ground troops for an
invasion of northern Iraq.
The Administration is also finalizing separate deals for Israel, Egypt
and Jordan. Israel is seeking a multiyear deal involving $4 billion in
new grants and $8 billion to $10 billion in US-government guaranteed
loans. Jordan is slated to receive an additional $1 billion in aid, and
Egypt is seeking new aid beyond its current $1.3 billion, plus a
free-trade deal similar to the one Jordan already has with the United
States. In exchange for the increased aid, Jordan is hosting US special
forces and engaging in joint intelligence gathering. Israel has shared
intelligence and helped train US forces for urban combat, but the
biggest "contribution" sought by the Administration is for the Sharon
government to refrain from retaliating in the event of an Iraqi attack,
to avoid regionalizing the conflict. Sharon has so far refused to make
any such pledge. From Egypt, a key Arab ally whose population is
overwhelmingly against the war, Washington is seeking a statement of
political support and the use of some air bases.
Outside the Middle East, the most important battleground is the
fifteen-member UN Security Council, where the United States is seeking a
resolution justifying the use of force to oust Saddam Hussein. So far,
Washington can count on support from the United Kingdom, Bulgaria and
Spain. Bulgaria's support was secured by a US pledge to see to it that
Iraq pays its outstanding debts to Bulgaria in the post-Saddam period.
The Administration's next objective is to win over "swing states" like
Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan with a mix of
promises and threats.
The United States is notorious for bullying nations over key Security
Council votes. In 1990, when Yemen voted against authorizing war on
Iraq, a US diplomat told the Yemeni ambassador, "That was the most
expensive no vote you ever cast." Three days later, all US aid to Yemen
was canceled. Last November, Mauritius recalled its UN ambassador and
gave him a public scolding for failing to speak out forcefully enough in
support of US-sponsored Security Council Resolution 1441 against Iraq.
UN expert Phyllis Bennis notes that Mauritius made this move to avoid
falling afoul of a provision of the African Growth and Opportunity Act,
which states that US aid recipients should not "engage in activities
contrary to US national security or foreign policy interests." The
Administration will seek to exert similar leverage over Guinea and
Cameroon, both of which are recipients of US aid under AGOA.
A new report from the Institute for Policy Studies provides a detailed
accounting of the military and economic levers the Administration is
likely to use to round up votes at the UN. For Mexico, a vote against
the United States could spark a backlash that would undermine aid and
trade, a daunting prospect for a country that sends 80 percent of its
exports to the US market. A no vote by Chile could kill plans for
granting it the same access to the US market that Canada and Mexico now
enjoy. Pakistan will have to weigh the costs of voting with the United
States and antagonizing its strongly antiwar population against the
costs of voting against Washington and risking cutbacks in the hundreds
of millions in US aid and loans it is receiving as a privileged ally in
the "war on terrorism." For Angola, future US loans for developing its
critical oil industry may hang in the balance.
Leaders in Donald Rumsfeld's so-called New Europe who have spoken out in
favor of the Administration's war policies are also hoping to receive
increased US assistance. As the Pentagon considers cutbacks in its
presence in Germany to punish the Schröder government for its
antiwar stance, prowar governments in Eastern and Central Europe may be
courted to host new US bases. In the process, they are likely to receive
special favors like the recent $3.8 billion US-government-subsidized
loan to Poland to finance the purchase of Lockheed Martin F-16 combat
aircraft. Don't be surprised if states like Hungary, which is hosting a
US training mission for Iraqi exiles, receive sweet deals for US
military equipment as a "thank you" for their support of the war in
Iraq. These arms deals will no doubt be helped along by influential
friends of the Administration like former Lockheed Martin vice president
Bruce Jackson, who serves as chairman of the Committee for the
Liberation of Iraq, a private, pro-intervention lobbying group launched
last fall with the blessing of the White House. Jackson was involved in
helping draft the widely publicized letter in support of Bush's Iraq
policy by leaders of Eastern and Central European states.
Given the military and economic leverage the Administration can bring to
bear, it's amazing that so many key governments have held out this long.
If the global peace movement keeps the pressure on, there may be time to
stop this war yet, despite the machinations of the President and his
hard-line advisers.
Copyright © 2003 The Nation
###
