Earlier this month, elections in the United Kingdom that returned British Prime Minister Tony Blair to a third term in office, unprecedented in the century old Labor Party’s history, and President George W. Bush’s visit to Russia to celebrate the 60th anniversary of Hitler’s defeat, with purposeful stops to the Baltic States and Georgia at the front and back ends of his journey, overshadowed much of the news, certainly in the West. And a lot of other news and major events there were. The Greater Middle East had more than its share. So too, from a Japanese perspective, does the latest maneuvers by North Korea regarding their nuclear programs add to and complicate this mix.
In Iraq, a government was finally formed and a Shia dominated committee nominated to draft a constitution by August 15th, mandated by the Transitional Administrative Law. However, the insurgency refused to back off and several hundred Iraqis killed over the past two weeks and the governor of al Anbar Province, the center of Sunni resistance west of Baghdad, kidnapped with four of his bodyguards. U.S. Marines, supported by air and other ground forces, launched a major offensive to the west near the Iraqi border with Syria. Fighting was fierce and the sophistication and cleverness of the insurgents worrying.
For those following the post-war insurgency, there has been great controversy in the United States over allegations of failing to provide sufficient armor and protective items for soldiers and marines. The HUMVEE, the 21st century of the World War II jeep, was the main focus followed by body armor and the absence of Kevlar inserts to enhance protection against bullets and shrapnel. The insurgents however have discovered armor piercing ammunition, or the notorious “cop killer bullets” as they are called in the United States. Hence, with readily available technology, the insurgents have been able to neutralize the expensive efforts to protect U.S. Forces with ammunition that slices through concrete, armored vests and much of the new shielding put on the HUMVEE’s. The point here is that Iraq, the United States and the coalition are up against a formidable opposition that gives no sign of quitting.
The insurgents have been targeting Iraqis rather than U.S. forces for some time. The reason is obvious. U.S. forces are not good targets who fight back and give far more than they receive. The cost exchange ratios of those killed in action are disproportionately stacked against the insurgents. Of course some, including this writer, who have talked about the possibility of an attack against Syria because the Bush administration believes that the only way to end the insurgency is to go its source, this operation could have been a warning or even a rehearsal.
Syria meanwhile has completed the bulk of its promised withdrawal of forces from Lebanon. Press reports claim that some 5000 Syrian intelligence agents remain behind and that Syria still has great power and influence despite the withdrawal. How all of this will affect peace and stability is uncertain and must be carefully watched.
Israel has delayed its promised withdrawal from the Gaza strip by two weeks. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon remains committed to this policy despite very strong domestic opposition especially from the far right and radical religious groups. But his ultimate aim may be to trade Gaza off for permanent control of the West Bank and West Jerusalem, intentions that will be absolutely unacceptable to Palestinians. Palestinians have no recourse except to resort to terror, something that appears very likely. And all of these events must be viewed in the context of Iran, its nuclear intentions and how successful or not diplomacy on the part of Britain, France and Germany are to convince Tehran that building an atom bomb is in no one’s interest.
From Tehran’s perspective, there is surely an argument for a nuclear deterrent. With the Untied States an adversary and Iran viewed as a member of the axis of evil, it comes as no surprise that many in Iran see a nuclear deterrent as the last recourse to prevent America from using force or blackmailing Iran to forego all nuclear aspirations. The other major enemy in the region, Israel, surely possesses nuclear weapons. Iran must consider itself a target.
On the other hand, sanctions and isolation from the rest of the world are not in Iran’s interest. Hence, on balance, negotiations are very sensible and a diplomatic solution possible. How this plays out in the coming weeks is also uncertain. But the point is that the Middle East is very much on the forefront of critical events with global consequences.
While North Korea is not part of this dilemma, what happens there regarding nuclear weapons is far from unimportant and not just for East Asia. Should both North Korea and Iran opt for nuclear weapons, the challenge to the international community would be fierce. During the Cold War, the United States and its allies were successful in deterring a Soviet Union with 45,000 nuclear weapons. That fact may be lost for the wrong reasons.
It may well be that the United States will view both the ayatollahs in Tehran and Kim Jong Il in Pyongyang as irrational, something by the way that was attributed to Stalin and Mao way back when. Kim’s rationality may also be debated in Asia. While Clinton Secretary of State Madeline Albright, warned before her state visit to Pyongyang in 2000 of Kim’s peculiarities, found him surprisingly well informed, knowledgeable, polite and charming, that may not be the universal opinion.
In the greater Middle East, as long as the United States is not prepared to take bold steps to resolve the Arab-Israeli-Palestinian impasse and regard Iran as anything other than a member of the axis of evil, the proliferation or control of nuclear weapons is dependent on Tehran not Washington. North Korea is different.
As argued in this column before, now is the time to think about expanding the Six Power talks on Korea to a broader agenda of preventing the use and spread of nuclear weapons. All nuclear powers---Britain, France, India, Pakistan and even Israel as an observer--- should be invited to an expanded fora. Building on the thirty year old Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE now the OSCE for office for), this group could be the basis for moving ahead to deal with prevention on all levels. Without such an effort or new, bold initiatives, we can find both the Middle East and East Asia facing what will be seen as a new nuclear crisis. Such an event, if it were to occur, is not a crisis, it is not new and it can be avoided. The question is whether or not the international community has the vision and stomach to understand and to react.
JIME Center.All rights reserved.