Sunday, April 18, 2004

How Close are we to Repeating WWI I don't think any of us realize the danger that now exists because of the miscalculations and arrogance of Sharon and the U.S. I don't think the worst case will come to pass, but I really feel Israel and the U.S. are operating in the same air of unreality as the European powers on the eve of World War I. The miscalculation in WWI was that first, some of the countries involved did not think they would actually have to go to war, and that secondly, if war did break out it would be quick and simple. The miscalculations today are that nationalist and religious Arab ideology can be defeated by military means, that the U.S. is invincible as the only superpower, and that the U.S. could never, under any circumstances, abandon Israel. I don't think enough people have thought through the consequence of U.S. military strategy in Iraq. The first problem is that the strategy is purely military. 12 months after the fall of Saddam, the U.S. still identifies its opponents as tiny minorities of terrorists and thugs, yet has lost more men to these opponents than to the entire Iraqi army under Saddam. So the U.S. continues to pursue a massive military response rather than negotiation. Otherwise the U.S. cannot sustain the fiction that they are there to serve the interests of the Iraqi’s.   If in fact a majority of Iraqi’s, especially Sunni and Shia, have moved to a nationalist resistance to throw out the occupation, it destroys the military’s raison d’etre.  Since the military and political leaders cannot admit that the people to whom they’ve come to liberate are turning against them, they will continue to be willfully blind to the changed facts on the ground.    As a result, there will be less and less support in the U.S., as like in Vietnam, fewer and fewer people believe the government rationale for the war.   The second problem is that the U.S. is weak enough to militarily lose Iraq.  The U.S. has firepower to destroy Iraq—to kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s if necessary.  But they don’t have the military manpower to hold Iraq.  In the UK Telegram today, the British commander basically says they are in Basra at the sufferance of the Shia, and if asked to leave, they will have to go.   An uprising would essentially push the coalition out of the South, force the U.S. to overstretch, and essentially require another hundred thousand troops that simply don’t exist.   Faced with a massive insurrection, no available troops, collapse of what remains of allied support, the U.S. essentially could be forced out of Iraq.  It is highly unlikely that the U.S. would nuke Iraq rather than leave.  So there could be a tremendous victory for the radical Arab guerrillas, essentially proving the strategic weakness of the U.S., and rapidly causing many of the region’s governments to reassess their alliances.   Now to Israel.  Sharon’s gamble to hold on to the occupied territories is that he can pay any price necessary because it is not paid by him, but by the U.S. If the U.S. is weakened by the collapse of the Iraq occupation and a lack of troops and will to stay there, to what extent will the U.S. continue to support the Israeli occupation?  Forced finally into a real choice between Israel behind 1967 borders or oil, will the U.S. not choose oil?     If the U.S. backs down from supporting Israel under the pressure of the Iraq debacle and the U.S. desire to stop losing American lives in the Middle East that puts Israel in a dangerously isolated position.  The only thing that prevents Israel from being overrun by the Arabs at that point is their nuclear weapons.   But unlike America, Israel may see fit strategically to threaten or even use nuclear weapons against Arabs if its survival is at stake.   To do so, however, would be the end of Israel, because it would be seen as a rogue, pariah state, unfit to be allowed to continue to exist.   So, the danger lurking below these miscalculations is a huge strategic loss for the U.S., the weakening appetite of the U.S. public for war on Arabs, the isolation of Israel, the potential for a nuclear conflict initiated by Israel, and a subsequent destruction and realignment of the region.  WWI anyone?? 3:33:02 PM   comment []

© Copyright 2004 Toby Sackton. Last update: 5/5/2004; 9:03:12 AM.