A regular session
of the War Experts Collegium took place in Moscow’s House of
the Russian Press. The problem on the agenda was how the world
would change after the war in Iraq. The Collegium reached a
conclusion that when the US/UK war broke out in Iraq contrary
to the will of the world community, the world organization
started changing for the order when the international law will
be replaced with US’s law of power. Participants of the
discussion pointed out the following peculiarities of the
situation.
Before the war in Iraq the Pentagon schemed
that the operations would last 1-2 weeks. The US military
command expected that mass airstrikes would demoralize the
Iraqi army, the US/UK troops would be welcomed by the Iraqis
as liberators from “tyranny”, different regions of the country
would be occupied stepwise, no civilians would suffer except
for Saddam’s family and the Iraqi administration; the Pentagon
planned that oil fields wouldn’t suffer as a result of the
operations and would keep on operating, oil produced in Iraq
would minimize US’s spending on war; Americans expected that
after overthrowing of Saddam’s regime the country would be run
by an allied war command just for some period, but then the
authority would be handed over to civilians loyal to the
occupants.
The ground operation sharply deviated from
the US scenario: the war was suddenly delayed because of
unexpectedly stiff resistance of the Iraqi people and the home
guard, because of the sand storm and the increasing number of
losses among the “liberators” which certainly some confusion
among the US/UK troops. As it turned out, psychologically
Americans were not ready for this scenario even more than the
UK troops. They were perfectly sure that Arabs were not a
worthy adversary for the US army from the point of view of
their military efficiency. The logic of Washington says: if
small Israel has been fighting against the whole of the Arab
world for over 50 years and is a success with the struggle,
then it will take the USA with its enormous military
superiority just few days to defeat the Iraqi army. This
explains the unconditional triumphant spirits of the Pentagon
and White House before and after beginning of the Iraqi war.
It’s obvious as well that the US army cannot retreat and will
carry the war through irrespective of antiwar protests all
over the world, in spite of severe losses among its own troops
and ignoring the increasing number of victims among Iraqi
civilians.
Iraq won’t be able to resist the USA and
Great Britain for too long, as the Iraqi army is equipped with
weapons and military technique of the early 1990s. They are
certainly of poorer fighting efficiency as compared with
forces intruding into the country. For this very reason the
Iraqi military command assumed the tactics of defending the
cities and involving the enemy in street fighting. This quite
naturally brings US’s military superiority to nothing; what is
more, America’s losses are increasing in such fighting and the
war operation itself gets protracted. However, Iraq is doomed
from a strategic point of view, as the USA will inevitably win
the war. It doesn’t matter for the White House any longer
whether the war will be long or finishes soon. It’s not
accidental that the US President asked the Congress to
appropriate extra 75 billion dollars for the war operation in
Iraq. Liquidation of Saddam’s regime is of higher importance
for George W. Bush and the US Administration, they want to
establish control over Iraq even if the victory will cost too
much.
The problem of legalizing the anti-Saddam war
and future Iraqi regime is also not so much important for the
White House. For the time being, Americans have failed to find
on the occupied territories any proof of Saddam’s possession
of weapons of mass destruction. Well, they may successfully
fabricate such proofs later, the same way it had been so much
“believably” done in Yugoslavia.
Results of the Iraqi
war can be summed up already now when the war is still
underway. US’s strategic gain is undoubted: the Iraqi regime,
so much disagreeable for the White House, will be overthrown;
the USA will become the key participant of the world oil
market; the UN and the UN Security Council won’t impede
realization of any war plans America schemes in any part of
the world, at best, the international organization may turn
into an international debating society.
The outbreak
of antiwar protests in Europe is dying out. Germany, that
strongly protested against the war in Iraq, now receives US
wounded delivered from the Iraqi battlefields. France is now
also watching how its considerable interest are being trampled
on in Iraq. China didn’t support the US/UK aggression in
Iraq; it’s highly likely that China supposed that further
serious diplomatic demarches might injure its interests
connected with commercial, financial and economic relations
with the USA.
Russia President Vladimir Putin voiced
position of the country and called the US/UK war in Iraq “a
gross political mistake”. However, at that the Russian
president hinted at a possible danger of establishment of US’s
law of power in the world instead of the present-day
international law norms.
The law of power is already
coming into effect in the USA as a substitute to the norms of
the international law. A US aircraft-carrier has been sent to
North Korean shores (the country is also disagreeable for
Washington). It’s reported the vessel is meant to participate
in Navy manoeuvres, but it seems to be going there for
reconnaissance.
