In his article in the Taipei Times the American Institute of Taiwan's Director Douglas Paal paints a rather glowing portrait of America's accomplishments in Iraq, since the collapse of former president Saddam Hussein's regime ("One hundred days in the New Iraq: a US diplomat's assessment," Aug. 14, page 9). In Paal's view, Iraqi security, economic fundamentals, availability of basic services and democratic institutions are gradually improving. To support these claims, he provides a list of accomplishments.
He points out that former soldiers of Saddam's regime are being paid a stipend, that banks are opening, that newspapers are flourishing, that universities are completing examinations, that soccer players are practicing without fear of torture and that the Baghdad symphony is performing for the public. While these accomplishments are good, they should not distract us from the broader, deeper issues of the day: Were the US and its allies justified in waging war on Iraq in the first place? Also, what burdens might we all shoulder because of the invasion of Iraq?
Remember how we were once told repeatedly by US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair of how Iraq was a menace to international peace and stability? Remember the claims about how Iraq was trying to purchase raw materials from Africa to support its nuclear weapons program? Remember the claims we heard about how Saddam's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) could be launched against other countries in just 45 minutes? The US, Britain and Australia based their case for war against Iraq primarily because of its alleged possession of WMD, which would have been a violation of UN restrictions.
Yet nearly four months since the cessation of major military operations in Iraq, no one has been able to discover Saddam's allegedly mighty WMD program. Moreover, media reports indicate that all Iraqi scientists in US custody have steadfastly denied the existence of an Iraqi WMD program, corroborating what Iraq's government under Saddam had been saying prior to the invasion.
Given the questionable pretext for the invasion of Iraq, and given the humiliating defeat brought upon Iraq by the US, Britain and Australia, it should come as little surprise that some Iraqi partisans have begun a guerrilla campaign against the occupying armies. For not only did the invasion remove Saddam's brutal regime, but also it removed what was left of Iraq's infrastructure after 10 years of brutal US-led UN sanctions.
At least some in Iraq want revenge for their predicament. There are lethal, almost daily attacks against American soldiers in Iraq. There have also been devastating assaults against Iraqi-owned (but American-controlled) oil pipelines. Yes, it is possible to dismiss these activities as the last, desperate punches of Baath Party stalwarts. However, even in Basra -- an area populated by Shiites who suffered persecution under Saddam's iron-fisted rule -- riots have erupted against foreign occupation.
Although Saddam was hated and feared by many Iraqis, the English-speaking occupation forces are hardly loved. In the words of Sabri Zugheyer, 45, a restaurant owner in Basra, "The British promised to make everything better, but now it's worse. Even in the old days it was never as bad as this." Four months following the cessation of major military activities, the Iraqis are enduring the misery and humiliation of a broken economy, a collapsed former government, an army of occupation, a foreign-appointed civil administrator a foreign-appointed Governing Council. At least one influential cleric in southern Iraq is now calling for the formation of an Islamic Army, presumably one to operate beyond the jurisdiction of the Governing Council and the English-speaking armies of occupation.
The legacy of aggression and deceit surrounding the invasion of Iraq has the potential to undermine international stability, even in areas far beyond the Middle East.
Consider Taiwan's situation. China has threatened to apply military force should Taiwan go too far in seeking its own sovereignty. In the face of this, the US has been attempting to serve as a calming influence in the region, urging both sides to work out a peaceful solution to the Taiwan Strait problem. Unfortunately, hard-liners within China's government and military may now argue -- with some persuasion -- that the invasion of Iraq by the US and its allies on trumped-up charges provides a precedent for the resolution of political and diplomatic differences through military might. Certainly, the US -- thanks to the Bush administration -- has lost much of the moral high ground when arguing for the peaceful resolution of differences between the two sides of the Strait.
In short, as an American living in Taiwan, I see little to be proud about in America's invasion and occupation of Iraq. Nonetheless, I am optimistic about the future of American foreign policy, as there will soon be a presidential election in the US and, hopefully, a badly needed regime change in Washington.
Nathan Jones is an associate professor in the department of foreign languages and literature at National Tsing Hua University.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs