Iraqi War Has Potential to Reshape World Order (People's Daily) (http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200303/26/eng20030326_114017.shtml) As the United States considers, Iraq would become an example for the Middle East as a stable and prosperous country through "nation re-building." It then would not only export oil but also "democracy."

If the United States wins the war quickly, the Iraqi issue could probably be solved.

But the world may then have to face the "American issue." It's a reasonably good article; the Chinese take on the Iraqi Bush War.

Iran: Khatami says all peace seeking states should help end war (Payvand's) (http://www.payvand.com/news/03/mar/1128.html) President Mohammad Khatami said in Tehran on Tuesday that all peace seeking countries are required to contribute to a speedy end to the ongoing war in the region and resumption of the impaired role of the UN, as the backbone of world peace and security, IRNA reported.

President Khatami in a meeting with new Norwegian Ambassador to Tehran Ole Kristian Holthe also underlined the need to prevent imposition of an alien government on Iraq.

He also stressed the need for swift establishment of ceasefire and forcing invaders to abide by UN and international regulations.

He said Iraqi people should decide their own destiny.

The president appreciated the stance of many European states vis-a-vis Iraqi crisis and said unfortunately, certain powers are not ready to heed the call of well wishers and of the world public opinion.

He said oppressed Iraqi nation and the soldiers dispatched to the region as a result of a wrong decision are all victims of the ongoing war.

He added that interests in future of human beings necessitate opposition to war and terror by all countries.

President Khatami said Iran's opposition to the start and the continuation of war in the region does not mean support for Iraqi regime, rather it is opposition to the wrong precedence of imposition of super powers' wishes through force and debilitating international organizations such as the UN. You know, when the Iranians are getting their shots in across the wire, there's something wrong with this war.

Random reading: U.S. caution on Basra revolt reflects bitter lesson (Forbes) (http://www.forbes.com/markets/newswire/2003/03/25/rtr919560.html)

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

Question : Is it just the US that will benefit from re-building contracts etc. or will the UK get a look in - Barrets homes in Bagdad. Will the Spanish open a new outlet of Zara's fashions, Basra their middle eastern flagship outlet??

I believe the situation has developed so that the world gets a piece of the pie. On the domestic front, I wonder how big Starbucks' contract will be? McDonald's?

:m:,
Tiassa :cool:

The Bush administration began handing out private contracts Monday to build water treatment systems, airports, bridges and other foundations of what President Bush envisions as a "peaceful and prosperous Iraq." The director of the U.S. Agency for International Development, Andrew Natsios, calls it "the largest disaster relief response we have ever put together."

No kidding. Since this nation's ultimate victory in the region rides less on the accuracy of its munitions than on whether it lives up to its stated ideals, the importance of the rebuilding effort can't be overstated.

The long-term battle to help Iraq is off to a bad start, however, with close U.S. allies like Britain fuming that the Bush administration has failed to involve them in the postwar reconstruction planning since in a secret process last month it invited a select group of U.S. corporations to bid for the tens of billions of dollars in work. The contracts, critics allege, could let the U.S. victors horde the spoils. The five companies that submitted bids -- Kellogg, Brown & Root, a division of Halliburton Co., the firm once headed by Vice President Dick Cheney; Bechtel Group Inc.; Fluor Corp.; Parsons Corp.; and Louis Berger Group Inc. -- gave $2.8 million in political donations from 1999 to 2002, 68% to Republicans and 32% to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

It's no surprise that Chris Patten, the European Union's external affairs minister, condemned the administration's slighting of European contractors such as ABB Ltd. and Siemens as "exceptionally maladroit."

If Congress doesn't pressure the Bush administration to open up bidding and involvement in postwar construction to a wide array of the best-qualified groups, it will not have a chance to do so later. That's because the contracts give the primary contractors an extraordinary level of authority to choose subcontractors and others who will share in the work -- and the money to be made -- from rebuilding Iraq.

why shouldnt we. france, germany and russia are trying to make sure we dont get any of the un money to rebuild. we dont need their help.

i love the fact that the us is screwing it's partner in crime (britain). it is the way this admin works. all you gotta do is turn your back to get shafted immediately!

what un money? give me numbers and sources

Cairo's Al Azhar University -- the most-respected institution of religious learning in the Muslim world -- has issued a fatwa, or religious edict, advising "all Muslims in the world to make 'jihad' against invading American forces." The statement warned that Islam itself is the direct target of the "new crusaders' invasion," aimed at humiliating and subjugating Arabs and controlling their resources.
Given its historical and religious symbolism and weight, Al Azhar's ruling is likely to resonate with the faithful.

Prominent Muslim clerics and political leaders have echoed Al Azhar. Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, a reformist who, as the grand sheik of Al Azhar University, was one of the first clerics to condemn the Sept. 11 attacks and to dismiss Osama bin Laden's jihadi credentials as fraudulent, ruled that attempts to resist an American attack are a "binding Islamic duty," and he asked Arab leaders to block any aggression against Iraq. Maligned previously as a pro-Western reformer, despite his support for Palestinian suicide bombers, Tantawi's new stance shows the extent of the realignment.

The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt -- a mainstream Islamist organization with membership numbers in the millions -- called on his followers everywhere to join in jihad in defense of Iraq. The Muslim Brotherhood has not been considered militant since the 1970s, when it disavowed violence and agreed to play by the rules of the political game.

Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, whose organization had been moving away from militancy in recent years, was even more explicit: Americans "will not be met in this region with roses, flowers and perfumes. They will be met with arms, martyrdom and rifles."

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said he wanted a resolution affirming "rejection of the military operation, rejection of occupation, and calling for immediate withdrawal.

Syria, which circulated a draft resolution condemning the invasion and demanding an immediate withdrawal.

Qatar's foreign minister, Sheik Hamad bin Jassem bin Jabor Al Thani, whose nation hosts the U.S. campaign's military headquarters, said, "It would have been better concentrating on practical solutions to find a way out."

The United States and Britain should withdraw their troops from Iraq immediately and without conditions, and the U.N. Security Council should hold an emergency meeting on the issue, the Arab League said Monday.

-------------------------------------------------------
Bin Laden must be laughing in either his grave or cave. His strategic goal was to mobilize Muslims worldwide to heed his call for jihad. But his apocalyptic nightmare initially fell on deaf ears. (gerges)

Arab politics is not so simple and clear, Spookz. I've posted this before, but another read might be in order. Here is the bit I found most interesting in this article :

The difference between official and private views of some ranking Jordanian officials may be an omen, too. Officially, they condemn the war and say they are "deeply troubled" by the prospect of repercussions of the war on the region, and describe the situation as "critical."
Privately, they say, the war is developing a new opportunity for peace in the Middle East. Says one former prime minister: "If the U.S. can get a new Iraq to recognize Israel as a quid pro quo for a final Palestinian settlement, others will fall into place — Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the other Gulf states. Iran would then have to pull back its military support for Hezbollah."

Official views, and private views. All is not as it appears. How many problems would any Arabic government voicing support for the US invasion have, at this point in time? Circumspection seems to be the key for them. Geez, they even face demonstrations if they don't word their objections "strongly enough". Think about it.

The original topic, including some links to the author of that article, who is not in favour of the war :

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=19477

i forgot to mention iran. they usually back their shiite brotheres in iraq, but this time they urge them not to rebel against saddam but to unite and fight off the invader.

marquis
i simply find it hard to imagine the average man on the street to share the sentiments as his leaders, especially if they have the impression that political decisions are being imposed from the outside. i cannot see the us ever supporting democracy in the me cos what tends to happen (impression) is that
religious parties get elected and it is just a matter of time until the fundies make their move. democracy in essence becomes a theocracy.


*i'll look for some actual examples if any