Al-Sharq Al-Awsat Writer: Iraq 'Deserves To Be Crushed,' 'Not Worth
Defending'

GMP20030128000160 London Al-Sharq al-Awsat in Arabic 28 Jan 03 p22
[Chief Editor Abd-al-Rahman al-Rashid: "Why The Baghdad Regime Does Not
Deserve To Be Defended" ]

[FBIS Translated Text] If the Iraqi regime went away, it will not be mourned
and if attacked tomorrow, it is not worth defending. More than any other
regime we have known in the 20th century, Iraq has been the biggest source
of unrest in the region.

Perhaps few are those who recall the Iraqi regime's long history of causing
tension back in the seventies because of the differences it had with
neighbors like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Syria. They may also remember the
ongoing war on its territories against its own minorities whom it kept
relocating from one place to another like cattle whenever it wanted to
enforce a demographic change in the country. Some of us also remember the
war against Iran, the only justification for which was greed to gain more
land and oil. Then we recall how Iraq used gas to kill the women, children
and elderly in the villages of Halabja. Then there was its occupation of
Kuwait and threatening the whole region under flimsy pretexts. Even after it
was defeated, Iraq continued to cling tight to its weapons and used hostile
language with all those around.

A history such as this is not worth defending and it is not worth the tears
that are shed for its sake. As a matter of fact, in the absence of the Iraqi
regime the Arab world will be able to breathe and find a glimpse of hope
that the region will see stability. If the Iraqi regime went away, the
problems that have eaten up the region making Arabs the mockery of the rest
of the world will come to an end.

Although I understand the fears of the majority and I share them. It is the
fear that the attempts to eliminate a regime like this one will be like
pulling out a tooth that has been eaten up by decay. The process will be
bloody and painful. Nevertheless, let us remember that taking it out is an
unavoidable necessity, and if it does not happen today, it will definitely
happen tomorrow because this difficult stage is inescapable. We share the
same fears at least when it comes to one aspect: That a war, no matter how
necessary it appears, is cruel and painful and will harm too many people
most of whom will be innocent. No one who is trying to find a way out of a
mess would delight in something like this.

However, the majority of the people here in our region are defending the
Iraqi regime's right to existence based on an incorrect political view. I am
not speaking of the humanitarian aspect here, because we all agree on that.
I am speaking about the political issue. The conviction that we need to
protect the Iraqi regime based on the argument that we need to protect all
the political Arab regimes is wrong. The principle in itself - which is
refusing foreign interference -- is not wrong. What is wrong is the fact
that we have chosen the worst and the most erratic of regimes, and one that
has created the most tension in the region, to defend. Protecting the Arab
regimes by using the Iraqi regime as an example makes all the Arab regimes a
subject of ridicule for the whole world. It places them in a spot where they
will be ignored by the rest of the world because this regime, in the eyes of
the world, is bloody and has committed crimes and stupidities that make
striking it and changing it altogether easy to justify. Why should we hide
behind this losing regime today or tomorrow? It does not matter who the
rival is in either case.

I am fully convinced that barricading to defend the Baghdad regime has
weakened the Arab case, because the Iraqi regime is an easy target and it is
easy to expose it and prove that it deserves to be crushed. This is what
makes implementing the principle of protecting Arab regimes by defending a
regime that we know is living in an ongoing domestic, regional, and
international crises, wrong. We must choose a regime that deserves to be
defended and it has an honorable history, which would make it easy for us to
use it as a high wall that protects others, rather than choosing a regime
that is sinful in its very foundation and practices. Instead of the United
States, it ought to have been us who took the initiative pulled it out
ourselves all together.

[Description of Source: London Al-Sharq al-Awsat in Arabic -- Influential
Saudi-owned London daily providing independent coverage of Arab and
international issues; editorials reflect official Saudi views on foreign
policy]