THE IRAQ WAR HAS INCREASED TERRORISM

By Florian Roetzer

[This article originally published in the German-English cyber-journal Telepolis October 13, 2004 is translated from the German on the World Wide Web, www.telepolis.de/deutsch/special/irak/18551/1.html.]

An Israeli think tank criticizes the Iraq war and discusses a military strike against Iran. In an international poll, the majority do not believe that the war has made the world more secure.

The British and American population does not believe that the war against Iraq has made the world safer, contrary to the declarations of their governments. Only 30 percent in the US agree with the government. 52 percent insist that the war has increased the threat of terrorism worldwide. The annual report The Middle East Strategic Balance of the respected Israeli “think tank” Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies [1] of the University of Jerusalem shares this assessment.

“Knowing what I know today, I would have made the same decision. America and the world are safer with Saddam Hussein in a prison cell. Because we acted in Afghanistan and Iraq, America is safer, and 50 million people now live in freedom.”
George W. Bush on October 12, 2004 [2]

The report says [3] that the Iraq war represents a great diversion from the “global struggle against terrorism”. Attention, money, personnel and resources will now be concentrated in Iraq. Bush sold the Iraq war as an element of the war against terrorism since Iraq cooperated with terrorists and could given them weapons of mass destruction. The report criticizes that the war did not weaken the Islamic terrorists but gave “encouragement to many terrorist elements, particularly al-Qaida and its allies.

Iraq has now become a good arena for the Jihad… With the increasing phenomenon of suicide attacks, the US presence in Iraq requires more and more resources that could have been used against different aspects of the global terrorist threat.

Yoram Schweitzer of the Jaffee Center warned that terror could pass over from Iraq to other countries. Saudi Arabia is especially endangered. “Saudi Arabia’s conquest is Bin Laden’s great dream.” Schweitzer also turned against the attempts of the Israeli government to describe the conflict with the Palestinian militants as part of the global war against terrorism. This is a “national” struggle. Groups like al-Qaida are not only directed against Israel. As he found out through conversations, Palestinian militants do not understand themselves as part of al-Qaida. Many even criticize the terrorist network and its methods.

The former Israeli army general Schlomo Brom who considers the war a strategic misjudgment supported the report’s criticism of the Iraq war. If the goal of the war against terrorism is “drying up the swamp and not only killing the mosquitos, it has now become very clear that Iraq is not the swamp.” The Iraq war has the opposite effect since it draws Islamic extremists from all over the world to Iraq to fight there.

ISRAEL IS STILL THE STRONGEST MILITARY POWER IN THE REGION

Israel’s situation in the region stands in the center of the report. In a reassuring way, the Israeli report confirms that the danger of a conventional war is trifling and the military gulf to the Arab countries has widened. This is also true for Egypt that can arm itself with weapons from the US. Many chances like Syria’s readiness for negotiations have not been exhausted while new dangers threaten from Iran and its nuclear program.

According to Ephraim Kam, the readiness of the US government to hinder Iran from nuclear armament even with force of arms has become greater. If Israel wants to strike militarily, an agreement with the US is first necessary. US troops are in Iraq between Israel and Iran. However a strike against the Iranian program would be more difficult that the 1981 bombardment of the Iraqi nuclear facility because Iran has four or five nuclear reactors and possibly even more unknown facilities. Shai Feldman, the director of the center sees Israel with an advantage in the area of non-conventional weapons despite the Iranian nuclear program but doesn’t exclude a preventive attack. Even if all the parts of the nuclear program cannot be destroyed, this program would be considerably weakened and repulsed with individual bombardments.

Brom said Iran arming itself with nuclear weapons would probably trigger a dangerous chain reaction. States like Egypt and Saudi Arabia would want nuclear weapons. This would make the whole region more insecure. It is only wishful thinking when some hope that the clerics in Teheran will be more rational as soon as they have nuclear weapons. Brom thinks a military “solution” would exceed the possibilities of the Israeli army. Iran is far away; many countries must be passed. Brom cannot imagine that the US would help since this would damage its already miserable reputation in the region.

Israel’s strategic situation has improved altogether. Advances have also been achie3ved in the struggle against terrorism. However the desire of the Palestinians to continue fighting has not slackened despite this impressive success particularly compared to other places. The “tactical” successes strengthen the hatred and resistance of the Palestinians and allow extremism to grow on both sides. The pensioned general Mier Elran, another member of the center, says the Israeli society has not collapsed in the four years of the Intifada and maintains an astonishing normality. Still the situation has not improved. “We cannot point to anything indicating we are moving toward stability and tranquility.”

THE WORLD IS NOT MORE SECURE

According to the AP-Ipsus, Americans doubt the claim of their government repeated like a prayer-wheel that the war against Iraq has made the world more secure since the country had no weapons of mass destruction and no programs for their development. This rhetoric is even less convincing in European countries. Last winter the majority in Europe said that the Iraq war increases the terrorist threat. In the meantime more and more people share this view.

Even in the countries participating in the US-led coalition, hardly anyone seems to believe that the “war against terrorism” can achieve its alleged goal in Iraq. Seven percent of surveyed Australians believe that terrorism was weakened through the war. 66 percent believe the opposite. Australians are still the US’ best alliance partner. In Italy and Great Britain, 74 or 76 percent say that the terrorist danger has grown. A miniscule four percent have the opposite opinion.

Half of surveyed Americans believe their government has fought terrorism well while 49 percent disagree. In Australia (44), Italy (37) or Great Britain (32), far fewer are convinced of the anti-terror policy of their governments. The percentage of people who fear terrorism has increased in most countries since February 2004 according to Ipsos-coworker Corman “People feel more and more insecure.”

On the other hand, a majority in Germany, France, Canada, Mexico and Spain are satisfied with the anti-terror policy of their governments that criticized the Iraq war. Germany is an exception. In Germany, the fear of terror has decreased a little. Ipsos says discussion of social- and economic policy has forced terrorism to the sidelines.