Qatar's
foreign minister ended a two-day visit to Baghdad on Tuesday, August
27, during which he added his voice to a growing chorus of Arab
opposition to a U.S. invasion of Iraq, complicating the Bush
administration's ability to launch an attack from the region, Los
Angeles Times reported.
The
announcement coincided with a failed attempt by President Bush to win
Saudi support for a military campaign and marked a victory for Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein's diplomatic efforts to shield his regime
from attack.
Saudi
Arabia already had ruled out the use of its territory as a base for a
U.S. war against Iraq, and the U.S. reportedly has been moving weapons
and equipment to Qatar in recent months. But the Qatari foreign
minister's statements suggested that the Persian Gulf state would not
be happy to serve as a base for a military campaign against Iraq, the
paper added.
“We
are against any military action,” Foreign Minister Sheik Hamad
Jassim ibn Jaber al Thani said Monday, August 26, on arrival in
Baghdad, adding that the United States has not asked for permission to
use bases in Qatar. “This issue should be resolved through the
United Nations and diplomatic means.”
The
Qataris also called on Hussein's regime to allow international weapons
inspectors back in to confirm that Iraq is not developing weapons of
mass destruction.
On
Tuesday, Bush met with Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan at
the president's ranch near Crawford, Texas. The Saudi side reiterated
opposition to any military effort to overthrow Hussein, calling
instead for a concerted diplomatic effort, Los Angeles Times added.
Meanwhile,
Iraq continued in gathering support every front for the Iraqi people
against the expected attack by the U.S. On Tuesday, the Iraqi foreign
minister was in China and his vice president in Syria.
Iraq
recently negotiated a $40-billion trade deal with Russia; has granted
more than $1 billion in contracts to Turkey as part of the UN-approved
“oil for food” program; returned looted archives to Kuwait;
exchanged with Iran the remains of dead from their 1980-88 war and in
March formally recognized Kuwait's territorial integrity.
In
addition, Public support in the Arab world for Iraq is fueled by
widespread anger over the U.S. relationship with Israel and the
equally widespread conviction that Washington is using its declared
war on terror as cover to advance its own interests. Public sentiment
is so universal that even Kuwait, which a U.S.-led coalition liberated
from Iraqi occupation in 1991, is officially opposed to an invasion.
“Kuwait
won't help the U.S. just for the sake of helping,” said Abdullah
Sahar, a professor of political science at Kuwait University. “It
will help if there is a clear plan that complies with United Nations
resolutions.”
“We
don't want to see an all-out invasion of Iraq by the U.S.; this would
mean all Arab countries are invaded,” he added.
Where
Baghdad has refused to budge is on the issue of weapons inspectors,
even while all of its Arab allies have called for Hussein to let them
back in.
When
a U.S.-led coalition forced Iraq out of Kuwait more than a decade ago,
the UN Security Council imposed sanctions that will be lifted only
when inspectors verify that Iraq's biological, chemical and nuclear
weapons have been destroyed, along with long-range missiles.
Inspectors have been barred since 1998.
In
an interview with Al-Raifdain weekly Iraqi newspaper Tuesday, Vice
President Taha Yassin Ramadan seemed to rule out Iraq's allowing
inspectors back in, though the regime has played two ways on the
issue, with some officials signaling that Baghdad is open to the idea
and others ruling it out.
The
UN inspectors “were the reason behind four U.S. aggressions on our
country since 1991. So why should their presence in Iraq now prevent
new U.S. attacks?” Ramadan was quoted as saying.
But
Baghdad's reluctance to let inspectors back has not diminished
pan-Arab support for Iraq, if not for Hussein personally. The main
issue for the Arab community is the conflict between Israel and the
Palestinians. Washington has insisted it is not-or, at least, should
not be-linked with regime change in Iraq, but in the Arab world, the
two matters are inextricable.
“We
are hurt by the policies adopted, implemented, followed, that have
resulted in total bias toward Israel. We are hurt,” Arab League
Secretary-General Amr Moussa said in an interview Tuesday.
“We
are hurt. We are angry, and we cannot forget what is going on or what
has happened to the Palestinians. We are in no mood to talk about any
attack against any other Arab country.”
Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak delivered a similar message Tuesday to his
nation in a televised address.
“I
told the American government: If you strike at the Iraqi people
because of one or two individuals and leave the Palestinian issue, not
a single ruler will be able to curb the popular sentiments,” he
said. “There might be repercussions, and we fear a state of disorder
and chaos may prevail in the region.”
“Of
course there is hatred among all people, because of the threat of the
United States attacking Iraq while the Israelis are attacking the
Palestinians,” said Mohammed Saleh Musfir, a political scientist at
Qatar University. “Why should America interfere?”
When
the U.S. built the international coalition that drove Iraq from
Kuwait, times were very different. Iraq was clearly viewed as the
aggressor. Saudi Arabia, which borders Iraq, was nervous that its oil
fields might be the next target of Hussein's military. And the
leadership in the region was generally terrified of an Iraq empowered
by Kuwaiti oil.
These
days, it is the United States that is widely viewed in the Middle East
as the aggressor. U.S.-Arab ties are strained throughout the
region-from Egypt, which is upset about a U.S. decision to link some
financial aid to a human rights case, to Saudi Arabia, which feels it
has been allegedly accused of interfering in September 11th attacks
which had no proof yet.
“The
situation is what we consider to be a clear aggression against a
sovereign state,” said Georges Jabbour, a professor of political
science at Aleppo University in Syria.
The
fact remains that the U.S. will work hardly to carry out its plans in
the Gulf as the American president George w. Bush put his point across
to Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan during talks at the
president's ranch in Crawford, Texas.