November 2000 - When America Really Changed

As always, Paul Rogers has an excellent take on the current political climate at openDemocracy:

There is no direct connection between the ‘war on terror’ and the Saddam Hussein regime in Iraq. Al-Qaida is part of a wider coalition of paramilitary groups and individuals drawing heavily on aspects of Islam. Their aims are directed at the eviction of foreign troops from the region, the downfall of the House of Saud and its replacement by an ‘acceptable’ Islamist regime.

Iraq is, in contrast, a primarily secular state currently controlled by a particularly brutal regime. There is no evidence of any substantial connection between the Baghdad regime and al-Qaida or any other similar group. The Bush administration has conceded that this week, and is not now seeking to make any direct connection.

In spite of this, the forthcoming war with Iraq is being related to the attacks of 11 September in more general terms, not least on the basis that Saddam Hussein, with his weapons of mass destruction, could serve as a source of such weapons for paramilitary groups. In essence, the line taken is that the need to terminate the regime is a direct consequence of the New York and Washington attacks, and the way in which the world changed irreversibly that Tuesday morning.

In practice, there is a much stronger counter-argument – that the greater change took place in November 2000, with the election of President Bush. In this view, the massacres of last September have, in a quite fundamental way, endorsed a US security outlook that sees it as essential to maintain and enhance an international order based on a neo-conservative view of the world. Where necessary, military force will be used to ensure this, and such use of force may extend to pre-emptive action...

The New York and Washington attacks have reinforced [this] dangerous world view, not opened it to question. We may have many months or even years of tension and conflict before it becomes apparent that regaining control through the use of military force is deeply counter-productive and against the long-term interests of the US itself let alone the rest of the world.

Other good stuff on openDemocracy from Omar Al-Qattan, Steven Lukes and Pervez Hoodbhoy. All three articles are structured in response to the Anthony Barnett piece I mentioned here.