George Monbiot (London Guardian): Beware the bluewash

[Jack Rabbit]

From the Guardian of London
Dated Tuesday August 26

Beware the bluewash
The UN must not let itself be used as a dustbin for failed American adventures
By George Monbiot

The US government's problem is that it has built its foreign policy on two great myths. The first is that it is irresistible; the second is that as time advances, life improves. In Iraq it is trapped between the two. To believe that it can be thwarted, and that its occupation will become harder rather than easier to sustain as time goes by, requires that it disbelieves all that it holds to be most true.
But those who oppose its foreign policy appear to have responded with a myth of equal standing: that what unilateralism cannot solve, multilateralism can. The United Nations, almost all good liberals now argue, is a more legitimate force than the US and therefore more likely to succeed in overseeing Iraq's reconstruction and transition. If the US surrendered to the UN, this would, moreover, represent the dawning of a fairer, kinder world. These propositions are scarcely more credible than those coming out of the Pentagon.
The immediate and evident danger of a transition from US occupation to UN occupation is that the UN becomes the dustbin into which the US dumps its failed adventures. The American and British troops in Iraq do not deserve to die any more than the Indian or Turkish soldiers with whom they might be replaced. But the governments that sent them, rather than those that opposed the invasion, should be the ones that have to answer to their people for the consequences.
The vicious bombing of the UN headquarters in Baghdad last week suggests that the jihadis who now seem to be entering Iraq from every corner of the Muslim world will make little distinction between khaki helmets and blue ones. Troops sent by India, the great liberal hope, are unlikely to be received with any greater kindness than western forces . . . .
The UN will swiftly discover that occupation-lite is no more viable than occupation-heavy. Moreover, by replacing its troops, the despised UN could, in one of the supreme ironies of our time, provide the US government with the escape route it may require if George Bush is to win the next election. We can expect him, as soon as the soldiers have come home, to wash his hands not only of moral responsibility for the mess he has created, but also of the duty to help pay for the country's reconstruction. Most importantly, if the UN shows that it is prepared to mop up after him, it will enhance his incentive to take his perpetual war to other nations.

Read more.

[Dancing_Dave]

1. Right on.

At least the intelligence of George Monbiot never fails! :)

[hang a left]

2. I just don't see it happening

I don't think there is anyway "they" are gonna give up their control. The reason we went and remain in Iraq is for the enrichment of the fascists. I don't see our boys coming home, I see something far more sinister.

[KoKo]

3. An excellent article. "Between Iraq and a Hard Place." It's a no win

situation. I had hoped the UN might stop the Invasion. But we control it so they have to act like our puppets. Mobiot's assessment is dark. But, rings true as to what will probably happen in the end. Another Viet Nam....

[Paschall]

4. Excellent piece

The last paragraph drawing a parallel between Soviet Afghanistan and American Iraq is somewhat chilling. Particularly since ShrubCo has so thoroughly busted the US Treasury.

[RainDog]

5. kick- strange I only read this sort of analysis

of the problems with Bush-think in a paper from outside the U.S.

[T_i_B]

6. This is why I am no longer involved with the Stop The War Coalition

I have campaigned with the anti-war people relentlessly in the build-up to war in order to stop it happening but now we have taken Bahgdad the presciption of Troops Out! offered by the Stop the War Coalition appears to be a bit on the knee-jerk side and will do more harm than good. To leave straight away with Iraq in its current mess would be to create a massive power vacum, destabilize Iraq even more and possibly even lead to civil war. At the very least the UN is the least worst option. What Monbiot is offering here does seem to be something of a non-solution to a massively important problem.

The UN may not be perfect but it is nonetheless a better alternative for the Iraqi people than the current US/UK occupation. The UN has the experience, the competence, the means to gather resources and the altruism in these matters that the UK/US forces do not.

Of course the UN route would inevitably involve Bush and Blair losing a large amount of control of Iraq, which is why the US junta opposes the UN route so vehemently. George Bush is not likely to use the UN as "the escape route" to an election victory as Monbiot claims and if you do not belive me then take a good butchers at this little lot from Richard Perle and Charles Krauthammer. It is also my opinion that if we are to get the UN into Iraq then we will need to put a Democrat into the whitehouse and maybe also get rid of Blair into the bargain.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,918764,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,921974,00.html

[Martin Eden]

7. the UN is far from perfect...

...but far more legitimate in the eyes of the world when it comes to determing the fate of Iraq, and much better at nation building than the incompetent Bushies.

Monbiot makes some excellent points, but I agree with you that he's not offereing any solutions -- and a solution is what's desperately needed here.

The US maintining complete authority in Iraq is among the worst scenarios -- for both Iraq and America. The Islamic world will never accept it, and this "war on terrorism" will be a self-perpetuating fiasco.

Admittedly, the UN will also have to deal with attacks by guerillas and jihadists. Could there possibly be a role for the Arab league? I know this is probably an unrealistic suggestion since shrubco would never go for it, but if the Arabs helped to work for a democracy in Iraq there might be less resistance, with the added benefit of having the Arab world actually involved in a democratic process.

Any Iraqi government formed at least in part by Arabs may have a better chance than one imposed from without.