The situation in Iraq worsens every day, becoming more and more transparently a major foreign policy disaster for the two key attackers, Great Britain and the United States. Tony Blair's approval rating has dipped to a measly 32 percent while Bush's was recently at an all-time low of around 45 percent.
Meanwhile, America's sons and daughters (notably none--to my knowledge--of the Bush administration's offspring) in uniform are paying the price for the war. They are suffering daily attacks in Iraq, with the latest military reports acknowledging 13 soldier suicides since the start of the war, admitting that the causes were probably linked to over-extended battle deployment in extremely hostile surroundings. The Iraqi Shia population officially joined what the U.S. had previously called a Sunni resistance to the U.S. occupation. A little over a week ago over 10,000 members of the Baghdad Shia community held a funeral for two Shias killed by the U.S. military. They took to the streets to, in the BBC's terms, denounce American terrorism. They chanted "No to America, yes to martyrs!" If one reads any of the foreign press accounts these days it becomes all too clear that the Iraqi people simply want the U.S. "liberators" out of their country.
None of this concerns the Bush administration. Or rather, it concerns them so much that they find it necessary to start another battle, to create another false threat where it simply does not exist and to perhaps invade another country in the hopes of regurgitating the rally-around-the-flag effect that gave Bush his near 90 percent approval rating after Spet. 11. The new threat takes form in the state of Syria. Israel's unlawful first strike attack against southern Syria on Oct. 5th set the stage for the U.S. Instead of condemning the attack as the rest of the international community did, the Bush administration praised it, citing Israel's "right to self-defense." Any lawyer of international law would recognize this as complete hogwash, but the Bush administration sets its own laws. After all, we bombed Iraq for 12 years, killed off 1.5 million Iraqis with U.N. sanctions and then occupied that country in the name of self-defense, didn't we? Or was it to liberate the poor Iraqi people, starved for years... by our own sanctions?
But it is forgive and forget for the American government, or at least that's what the Bush administration hopes the public will do. It is now sighting Syria's supposed failed cooperation in the War on Terror as grounds for increasing diplomatic and economic sanctions on the country. Yet, as The Nation has noted, immediately after Sept. 11, the U.S. government received a very extensive list of files on al-Qaeda, telling it of terrorist cells in the Middle East and Europe, and even detailing future attack plans. These files, however, did not come from Israel or Saudi Arabia--two of our publicly declared strongest allies. Instead, they came from the government of Syria. Syria's reward? It's own special place on the "Axis of Evil" list. After the U.S. refused to condemn the first belligerent Israeli attack on its soil in decades, Syria still reluctantly signed on to the latest U.S. resolution concerning Iraq, which desperately calls for increased support and legitimacy in its operations there.
One of the central demands of the latest U.S. congressional bill on implementing even stricter economic and diplomatic sanctions upon Syria is its withdrawal from Lebanese territory. Syria has occupied Lebanon since 1976, when they were asked to intervene in Lebanon's civil war by the Lebanese right-wing parties. Syria's role was to ally with the right-wing Lebanese parties to crush the burgeoning left-wing movements within Lebanon (especially the Communist Party there), and the growing Palestinian movement. From the beginning, despite the illegality of the occupation, the U.S. actually supported the Syrian presence in Lebanon, as they were working to protect what the U.S. government saw as its own interests. Yet now, with current Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq Hariri in charge, and the civil war over, the U.S. is no longer in need of the Syrian presence. Hariri, a billionaire businessman, has proved an even more willing collaborator with U.S. interests. His personal privatization programs coincide perfectly with America's goals in the region, but conflict with the political interests of much of the country, especially those of Hezbollah and the weak Palestinian refugee population.
The Lebanese street is not fooled by these latest American claims that Syria should face increased international pressure if it does not withdraw from Lebanese territory. The Lebanese--especially the Lebanese leftists--more than anyone else have a right to be disgusted by the Syrian presence in their country, as it resulted in a prolongation of the civil war there, and many brutal internal policies of repression since. The Lebanese newspapers, however, are reporting extreme disgruntlement among the general population, especially the left, at the increased American threats towards Syria. Why is this the case?
The answer seems to lie in the fact that many of these Lebanese left-wingers know their history. I conclude here with a few of the most common questions now being asked by the very same Lebanese who have suffered and continue to suffer under a repressive Syrian occupation of their country. If the U.S. is so concerned about foreign nations occupying our territory illegally, why did it not denounce (instead of support) the illegal Israeli occupation of Lebanon that lasted for 22 years (1978 to 2000) until Hezbollah resistance helped kick Israel out? Why did the U.S. ignore the 10 U.N. Security Council Resolutions, beginning with Resolution 425, passed immediately following Israel's initial occupation of Lebanese territory in 1978, which demanded an unconditional Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon? Lastly, after an unprovoked Israeli strike upon Syrian territory, why is the U.S. not demanding an end to the illegal Israeli occupation of the Syrian Golan Heights in addition to an end to the Syrian occupation to Lebanon?"
Yousuf Al-Bulushi is a Trinity senior. His column appears every third Tuesday.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.