|
Even without a damning report of the UN inspectors, the US is seemingly
poised to go to war to oust the Saddam regime from Iraq. The Brits
are the only country firmly in support, quite a few allies are wavering
publicly about their commitment. While a “smoking gun” in
the form of direct evidence is still not forthcoming, the secondary
reasons include the anticipated destabilization of the entire Middle
East because of the backlash among the Muslim populace. Purists also
argue about a legal basis to initiate war. In DAVOS on Sunday Jan 26,
US Secretary of State calmed the fears of the world’s elite while
giving a logical explanation of present US troop deployment in the
region. However, he said that if need be the US was prepared to go
alone.
The US had a legitimate reason to oust the Taliban regime from Afghanistan,
they were not only giving sanctuary to terrorists but in fact had allowed
them free rein to train terrorists to perform horrific acts diverted
against innocent civilians such as 9/11 all over the world. While we
must have sympathy for our Afghan brethren, it was not very “brotherly” of
the Taliban hierarchy to hand over their Pakistani comrades to the Northern
Alliance in exchange for their escape to freedom. Fully 6,000 Pakistanis
were buried alive in containers by Rashid Dostum in Shebergan. The Taliban
evacuated Kabul in good order leaving the Pakistani element to cover
their withdrawal. TV shots showed some of these poor Pakistanis being
shot like dogs in Kabul’s street drains, those who survived still
languish in prisons, some are let off from time to time. The final irony
is that the Afghans are asking for ransom to let them off. There is the
still unexplained transfer of about 120 plus Pakistani prisoners to India
by air by the Northern Alliance’s Interior Minister Yunus Qanooni.
Respected religious leaders like Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Maulana Fazlur
Rahman of MMA must question the Afghans (both in and out of power) for
this brutal treatment of Pakistanis by our so-called “brethren”.
Our respected MMA leaders must also like to question why not a single
Pakistani, not one, was in the Al-Qaeda hierarchy? Pakistan has been
used as a transit point and a logistics base for over 20 years by the
Afghan Mujahideen and the Arab/Muslim coalition that supported the Mujahideen’s
Jihad against the Soviets, and then later against Ahmed Shah Masood’s
Northern Alliance. A fair percentage bought property in Pakistan and
their families became more legitimate than legitimate Pakistani citizens
on the strength of the money they spread like confetti. Obviously the
world thinks of Pakistan as a base for “world terrorism” and
the Indians fan this canard for all its worth. It is profoundly shocking
to have this perception seen as a fact by the world’s intelligentsia.
The truth is that Osama bin Laden never trusted Pakistanis; they were
simply convenient mules to carry his arms and baggage around and provide
him safe houses. If there was even one single Pakistani among the Al-Qaeda
hierarchy Osama bin Laden could have never avoided ISI’s monitoring
and surveillance about his no-good activities.
In the prevailing circumstances, let us for once examine the question
of Iraq with our senses and not our emotions. Saddam Hussain is a cold-blooded
murderer who has killed more Muslims than Changez Khan and Halaku Khan
put together. In the war with Iran more than a million Iranians were
killed, both military and civilians since Saddam bombed Iran’s
cities indiscriminately, he also used Russian-supplied Scud missiles.
Saddam has used chemical weapons on Iraqi Kurds in the north and Iraqi
Shias in the southern mashes, for good measure, he gassed 35,000 of the
best Iranian troops in the Fao Peninsula. Even Slovodan Milosevic of
Yugoslavia and Russian President Putin have killed less Bosnians and
Chechnyan Muslims (about 200,000 each) in the last ten years or so. In
the two wars he launched (both against muslim nations, Iran and Kuwait)
Saddam unilaterally broke existing agreements that he had signed without
provocation or warning. In both cases the reason was greed, he wanted
to grab their oilfields. Among the lesser atrocities, he had his sons-in-law,
both generals, killed in front of their own wives and children.
Saddam has never had one good word about Pakistan, certainly has never
supported Pakistan on Kashmir. In contrast he has always been a good
friend of India. During the Gulf War he parked all his civilian aircraft
fleet in India, recently he asked for Indians to be on the UN inspection
team. And why Indians of all the nationalities one may ask? Was it to
blackmail the Indians from doing proper inspection? Could it be the Indians
have been helping develop his nuclear weaponry? Which leads us to the
half a dozen or so Indians who died in the Israeli raid that knocked
out Iraq’s nuclear reactors at Osirik in 1982, what were they doing
there? Putting it bluntly, we may have sympathy for the Iraqi people;
they are as much victims of Saddam’s sadism as Iraq’s poor
neighbours, but not for Saddam Hussain. The Baath Socialist Party is
a secular entity giving only lip-service to Islam when it suits them.
Since Saddam and his present cronies have a known record of atrocities
both at home and abroad, and on whose hands “weapons of mass destruction” will
be an invitation to disaster, sooner rather than later, the US should
seek a UN resolution declaring Saddam Hussain and his close aides as “international
outlaws”. Muslims will certainly be emotional about the Iraqi people,
so why not separate Saddam’s fate from theirs? And if Iraq has
to be occupied for some time to give time for a successor regime be legitimized
by a free vote of the Iraqi people, many muslim countries on Iraq’s
borders should be part and parcel of the occupation forces; this will
calm and assuage Muslim fears about US long-term economic intentions.
If a war has to be waged to punish Saddam for his crimes against humanity,
and to pre-empt further worse crimes in the offing, the war has to be
focused on Saddam so that the punishment is only for him and not the
Iraqi people, suitably adjusting Dostovesky’s “Crime and
Punishment” to reflect “Crime, War and Punishment”.
|