Missiles are manna for Saddam

Arabs are well aware that Saddam has played cat and mouse with the UN weapons inspectors. Butthere is wide sympathy for Baghdad8217;s argument that the West is fundamentally biased in insisting on Iraqi disarmament while saying nothing about Israel8217;s atomic and other weapons of mass destruction.

The UN trade sanctions can be lifted only when the UN certifies that Iraq is free of non-conventional weaponry. But Iraq has argued that the sanctions were ultimately intended to do more than force Baghdad to cooperate with the weapons inspectors. The real purpose, says Baghdad, has been to weaken the regime to the point where it can be overthrown. In the region, the Iraqi argument is widely accepted and, in private 8212; and since earlier this year in public too 8212; western officials have said little to suggest that Baghdad has got it wrong.

Doubtless the impact of the sanctions has been grossly exaggerated by Iraq8217;s propaganda machine. But ordinary Iraqis have plainly suffered greatly, and images of malnourished and sick children have done much to undermine support for sanctions, especially in the Arab andMuslim worlds. The deadlock in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process has been another critical factor in eroding regional support for action against Iraq.

In 1990, at the time of the first Gulf crisis, the construction of an anti-Iraqi coalition which included Arab states was possible only because there was the prospect of movement on Palestine. But since the election of the hardline Benjamin Netanyahu as Israeli Prime Minister in May 1996, the peace process has all but died.

The pro-Israeli lobby in the US is strong enough to ensure that the Israelis have continued to be pampered with US weaponry and dollars even as they have defied Washington8217;s demands for a more conciliatory stance towards the Palestinians. Nor has Israeli defiance of UN resolutions on Palestine and on Lebanon where Israel remains in occupation of a border strip resulted in sanctions.

US diplomatic support has ensured that Israel has suffered nothing but mild raps across the knuckles. It is glaringly obvious that Israel can defythe US and the UN with impunity while Saddam must suffer repeated air strikes for doing the same. Against that sorry background, what are the strikes likely to achieve?

It is hard to imagine that Saddam will ever allow the UN weapons inspectors to return to work in any meaningful way. So in that respect the effect will be the opposite to that intended. The raids themselves, and the inevitable civilian deaths, will inflame anti-Western feelings in the region. Riots have already erupted in Jordan, Palestine and Egypt and more can be expected.

The risk of terrorist attacks against Western interests and Westerners is great, especially in countries such as Egypt where Islamist groups have been conducting violent campaigns. Israel can also expect to find itself facing an upsurge of terror. Arab governments, well-disposed to the West, will find it even harder to show their friendship.

Saddam, meanwhile, will use the crisis to portray himself as the sole Arab leader with the will to stand up to the West; as anArab hero, a latter-day Saladin facing the modern Crusaders. His standing in the region is likely to soar. For him, the cruise missiles are manna from heaven. None of this makes Saddam a nice person or excuses his brutal record. The Arabs have few illusions about their leaders. But in times like these, their distrust of the West and its double-standards takes precedence.

Washington and London insist that 8220;something8221; had to be done. But the only 8220;something8221; with any hope of making a real difference is the installation of a new regime in Baghdad. This cannot be achieved without killing Saddam, which is no easy feat in view of his tight security; or without a land invasion, which is unthinkable. And if you cannot do anything worthwhile, it may have been best to do nothing at all.