|
When US President George W. Bush announced the ending of the major combat operations in Iraq on May 1, he was accorded a broad applause both in and outside his administration, and the Pentagon was even more complacent. But now confronted with the questioning about the increasing casualty of the US soldiers in Iraq, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld compared it with the high rate of murder in the Washington D.C., believing that such a trifling number wasn't worth mentioning. However, during the last three months, almost not a day passed without seeing the US troops in Iraq be bombed or attacked with the death toll climbing to 151, exceeding that of the Gulf War in 1991. Gen. John Abizaid, the newly appointed US Central Command Commander, recently acknowledged despite the previous gleeful tone of the Pentagon, the American forces stationed in Iraq are now faced with the threat of "increasingly organized" and "classical guerilla-type " campaign. The US-led coalition forces occupied Iraq, but nowadays come under continuous resistance.
To ease pressure on American troops in Iraq, the US Senate has lately unanimously adopted a resolution urging the Bush Administration to ask the NATO to send its troops to Iraq. People still remember that the US once spared no glance at the suggestion that the NATO dispatch troops to support the country in the Afghan War. People should also remember in what a disdainful tone that Rumsfeld ever likened Germany and France to the out-dated "old Europe", and he even indicated scornfully that the US would be able to launch the attack against Iraq and win the war without the support of its staunch ally Britain. Toady Mr. Secretary of Defense has to tarry a little of his arrogance and sincerely invite Germany and France to participate in the peacekeeping mission there. Nonetheless, the NATO Secretary-General George Robertson responded that the NATO has so far no intention of playing a direct role in Iraqi peacekeeping as an entirety. Besides, countries such as Germany, France and India all voiced clearly that without a UN mandate they will not join in the peacekeeping in Iraq. As French President Chirac put it, "within the present framework, it is unimaginable that France contributes troops to a multinational peacekeeping force in Iraq."
The current situation in Iraq indicates that it was unwise for the US to have unilaterally launched military attacks against Iraq in sheer disregard of its allies' advice and the international anti-war opinions. Attacks against the US troops have occurred from time to time, while casualties have become almost daily. It's a matter that intrigued the homesickness of the US soldiers and sapped the morale of them. The monthly military cost has amounted to as huge as US$3.9 billion. If things continue this way, the US certainly cannot shoulder up such a heavy burden. All of these are facts that the US has to face and deal with.
The establishment of Iraqi Interim Administration should have brought about some ease: For the war-torn Iraqi common people, it's better to have a government instead of none, and most of them hoped that a normal life could be restored as early as possible. Neither does the international community expect to see the chaos continuing in Iraq, which in return undermines the regional stability and the world peace. In view of this, the aforesaid foundation should have been a significant step towards the stability and reconstruction in Iraq.
Regretfully, the Interim Administration lacks legitimacy, as it was propped up by the US occupier instead of being elected by Iraqi people or formed by the United Nations.
To pull itself out from the quagmire of the post-war Iraq, the United States seems to have no other way out but to return to the United Nations framework. Washington should sincerely invite the United Nations to play a leading role rather than making it merely a "super red-cross" over Iraq. After all, the UN is the exclusively legitimized body in the world to form a multi-national peacekeeping force to replace the US-British allied troops in Iraq. Only a new Iraqi government formed under the UN authorization can win the support and recognition of Iraqi people and the international community as well.
(People's Daily July 23, 2003)
|
