Bush is winning by failing -- divide and conquer
And what if Bush is already winning?
Mona Sarkis 27. January 2007
Expansion of the conflicts, fragmentation of the region. Strategy without substance, but with success?
George W. Bush wants the “victory " in the Iraq. It underlined that again in its speech for the situation of the nation. Which he understands by it, remained already in his speech from 10 January nebulös: It is a victory against the terrorism, “will not look like those (victories), which obtained our fathers and grandfathers”. Less heavily with the articulation of its conceptions meanwhile many Middle East observers do. Of Bush strategy in the Iraq as in the entire region first the expansion of the local wars (see Alain
is, for a fragmentation of the middle east (so Walid Charara of the Lebanese daily paper “Al-Akhbar”) a thesis, for which some speaks and at that above all one concerned: the strategy could function. Gresh)
Democratic reforms do not stand obviously any longer on of Bush agenda, noticed for Abdel Beri Atwan, editor-in-chief of the per-Palestinian daily paper “aluminium-Quds aluminium-Arabi” appearing in London in its
Actually many Iraqi Sunniten are convinced the Shiites revenge at Saddam that it concerns a nationally sanctioned murder, with which to take wanted. Also most Sunniten of the neighboring countries sees itself turning it so and with an increasing mixture from fear and anger against the own Shiite fellow citizens and against Iran as the only Shiite state.
Breaks without borders
Parents of Algerian students ask the responsible authorities in an open letter in
Pass on, believe this and above all the escalations in Lebanon and in Palestine, which possibly flow into civil wars, of Bush “conquer and divide” - strategy Walid Charara, responsible for the opinion sides of the oppositionnear Lebanese daily paper “Al-Akhbar”. Antoine Sfeir might follow here.
For a long time
Sunniten: Quiet doubts…
The fact that the ditches between the communities in and outside of Iraq already existed before the US invasion into the Iraq does not deny - nevertheless only the removal of Saddams regime opened the can of the Pandorra. Since that time of the USA operated culture of the force does not set however by any means on the canalization of the breaking out, but on soldiers, with whom a civilian society leaves itself hardly to past.
The newspaper continues to ask, as much death and destruction will have which effects on the relationship between crew and Iraqi population. The stress is on “population” and not on a separate Ethnie. This is remarkable, because the newspaper by the Saudi prince Salman is Abdul Aziz controlled and thus is to be added to the per-American “axle of the moderate ones”.
Straight however its alliance with many Sunni dominated states in the region help the acting US president to what his predecessors had remained refused - a new middle east. So anyhow Edward Luttwak, senior Fellow for preventive diplomacy at Washington centers for the Strategic and internationally Studies, which at the same time regards this access to the region not for the result of a thought out strategy,
The result however is the same: Bush succeeded it to bring Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordanian one and the Gulf States on its side by making it impossible for them, in the future the interests of the USA to ignore, because this would run their own interests contrary. To those do not only belong the containment of the terrorism, but also the “thing with the democracy”, with which the USA “do not trouble " their “friends " with appropriate behavior became, like Joseph Samaha spöttelt, editor-in-chief of the decidedly against the western colonial policy arguing “Al-Akhbar”.
Differently than Luttwak
German original article URL: http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/24/24521/1.html