Trying to justify renewed U.S. aggression, Vice President Richard Cheney said in a speech on the U.S. warship USS John C. Stennis that "the war will end when we and our allies have delivered justice in full measure and no terrorist group or government can threaten the peace of the world." Cheney spoke to sailors after visiting the capitals of several U.S. allies in the Mideast. "Our next objective," he said referring to Iraq, although not by name, "is to prevent terrorists, and regimes that sponsor terror, from threatening America and our allies with weapons of mass destruction."

Bush gave a similar talk that same day in Fayetteville, North Carolina, to an audience of 2,000 people that included special forces and other troops. He urged Congress to approve his proposed $48 billion increase in military spending "so we can plan for this war." Two days earlier Bush said that he "understand[s] there's going to be loss of life," in a military onslaught against Iraq. "But I strongly believe we're doing the right thing."

The U.S. government is demanding that the regime in Baghdad open up Iraq to unconditional and unlimited inspections of any site, under the guise of searching for weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi government has so far refused to agree to such an abrogation of national sovereignty. Instead, the Saddam Hussein government has said it will cooperate with the United Nations in inspecting specific sites under an agreed-upon timetable.

The Clinton administration used Baghdad's expulsion of UN "weapons inspectors" as the pretext for launching a four-day military assault in December of 1998. The bombing raids by U.S. and British forces destroyed schools, hospitals, grain depots, and private homes, as well as military sites. In January the following year U.S. government officials were forced to admit that the "inspection" teams were in fact U.S. spies who carried surveillance equipment that allowed them to snoop on radio, cell phone, and walkie-talkie communications by members of the Iraqi security network.

Seeing that the demand for unrestricted access by inspectors may be subject to long and drawn-out negotiations, Washington hauled out Central Intelligence Agency chief George Tenet to testify before a U.S. Senate committee that the U.S. government is still investigating whether Iraq or Iran was involved in the September 11 attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center.

"Baghdad has a long history of supporting terrorism, altering its targets to reflect changing priorities and goals," Tenet said, using the most vague and general terms. "It has also had contacts with al Qaeda," he asserted, adding that the "two sides' mutual antipathy toward the United States and the Saudi royal family suggests that tactical cooperation between them is possible, even though Saddam is well aware that such activity would carry serious consequences."

One notable side of the administration's tough talk is that the arrogant Bush and Cheney rarely mention Iraq by name. While the entire world is operating under the assumption that the biggest imperialist power is moving to launch an assault, the U.S. government's top elected officials who are directing the push have lower officials and the big-business media do their dirty work for them.

For example, while Cheney never uttered the word "Iraq" in his speech to sailors on the Stennis, the New York Times reported, "The "Bush administration is determined to confront Iraq...to stop terrorists and rogue states from developing weapons of mass destruction."

The Times claimed that Cheney spoke to "thousands of cheering sailors." Most of them, however, didn't hear a word he said, since "his speech in the Stennis's cavernous hanger was inaudible to most of the assembled sailors because the PA system didn't work," wrote BBC reporter Tom Carver.  
 
Public objections from Arab regimes
During his sweep through the Mideast, Cheney encountered public objections to a renewed strike against Iraq on the part of government officials from Egypt to Saudi Arabia. "I do not believe it is in the United States interests, or the interest of the region, or the world's interest," Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah told ABC News.

"The people who are dying today on the streets are not a result of any Iraqi action. The people are dying as a result of an Israeli action," said Crown Prince Salman of Bahrain, reflecting the anxiety of the Arab rulers at the prospect of supporting an imperialist onslaught against Iraq while Tel Aviv conducts its unrelenting assault on the Palestinian people.

A number of Arab officials encouraged Cheney to both help de-escalate Israel's assaults on the Palestinians and press harder for the return of UN "weapons inspectors" to Iraq.

"We will try this direction as far as we can," Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak said in a joint press conference with Cheney at a U.S. military base in Sharm El-Sheikh. "Then after that, if there is nothing happening, we will find out what will be done" by Washington. According to the Wall Street Journal, Mubarak "didn't rule out the possibility" of joining a U.S.-led military operation aimed at overthrowing the Iraqi government.

Government officials in the Arab countries also recognize that their statements of opposition to Washington's military plans mean little to their imperial overlords. "The Americans these days don't even listen to the Europeans, so are they going to listen to us?" asked an unnamed Arab official quoted in the Financial Times.  
 
Mild criticism from Moscow
The Russian government, which opposed the 1998 air strikes, issued mild criticism of Washington's latest war drive against Iraq.

Defense minister Igor Ivanov called for a large team of international inspectors to search Iraq for "weapons of mass destruction." If weapons are found, he said, "we have to meet again and decide what further pressure should be applied."

The U.S. drive to war on Iraq has sparked divisions within the Labour government of Prime Minister Anthony Blair. Home Secretary David Blunkett warned cabinet members that an invasion of Iraq could provoke "major disturbances" in Britain. Some 120 Labour Members of Parliament signed a House of Commons resolution opposing British involvement in any U.S. military action.

Clare Short, the international development secretary, said on BBC television that she might resign if London joined a military assault against Iraq. "I'm proud to be a member of the government but I've got lots of bottom lines," she declared. "I don't expect the government to breach them but if they did I would [resign]."

As Washington campaigns for a massive onslaught against Iraq, the capitalist media continues to float rationales for the possible use of a "low-yield nuclear weapon" against that country. Discussion is under way in Washington, the New York Times reported, concerning the development of a weapon that would harness a nuclear blast to dig deep underground to destroy such sites and "keep nuclear fallout to a minimum."

Meanwhile, the Pentagon is "rushing to produce a new and bigger bunker-buster bomb" called "Big BLU," the Washington Times reported March 15. The new weapon, which is being developed for the Air Force by Northrop Grumman Corp. in California, will be packed with 30,000 pounds of high explosive, and will be six times larger than the thermobaric bomb recently dropped on caves in Afghanistan. The targets for the bomb? Alleged "underground hideouts" used by Saddam Hussein.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home