On March 20, 2003, the public opinion in Saudi Arabia is making itself heard -a rare occurrence in this country- and it is definitely against the war. They are particularly unhappy that their government let the "infidels" use their sacred Muslim soil for a war against another Muslim country. It is worth watching what will happen there in the future. It is already clear that it will not be a few steps towards democracy but on the contrary, a run ahead towards a fundamentalist regime.
Peace marches took place all over the world, as this war is highly unpopular. The British and American propaganda machine has not been able to convince millions of people of the necessity to invade Iraq. It is foreseen that millions will protest on Saturday March 22, 2003. The biggest rallies should take place in Australia, Britain, France, Italy, Spain, the USA, etc. In England, hundred of young students left their classrooms to show their feelings, and in San Francisco 1,600 people were arrested by the police while taking part in protests against the war. Many actors are anti-war and it is feared that they will take the opportunity to make their opinion known worldwide. Leaders of the main religious faiths in Britain, and the Pope in Rome, manifested also their opposition to the war. It is obvious to all, excluding the American and British governments, that this war of invasion is not popular, as people do not like unjustified invasion of a foreign country. Iraq is not a threat to the US or Britain, and it has never been shown to be linked to international terrorism. It is a shame, even if most people would not mind seeing Saddam Hussein removed, but not this way.
Washington accused Russia of selling arms to Iraq until a few days ago. Russia reacted very strongly on March 24, 2003, rejecting these allegations as totally false. The divide between Washington and Moscow is widening.
On March 29, 2003, it was clear that the distribution of the little food, water and medicines available for the Iraqis was a complete chaos and the people suffer. The amount of supplies required was not correctly foreseen -or was ignored- and everything is lacking. Some journalists made a few calculations and found that the money that will be spent on the war could have been enough to feed all the hungry people of the world for a long period of time.
On March 29, 2003, Downing Street was complaining that the British media, but especially the BBC, was distorting the truth about the war in Iraq. The BBC's political editor, Andrew Marr, retorted that the ministers looked at anyone reporting a balanced view as favourable to the Iraqi regime. The government, in his view, was "angry because, although they can control where the reporters go, they cannot control what they see there." It is a fact, however, that we are inundated with war news 24 hours a day with the result that the same actions are shown many, many times on television.
America's military and political leaders were quite busy on March 30, 2003, to try to dispel the general feeling among the media and the public that they disagreed in the past, and still do, on the war strategy. In particular they are trying to dispel the view that a pause has been decided in the war. The pause, if there is any, has been imposed by the military commanders who are said to be furious that they did not get the number of troops they thought necessary. The politicians, in particular Donald Rumsfelt, only allowed them a smaller number. Also after Turkey refused the use of their soil by the US to attack from the north, General Frank argued for a delay but Rumsfelt again rejected the request. In addition it looks like the supply of satellite-guided bombs is running out.
On March 30, 2003, Robin Cook the British ex-Foreign Secretary and Leader of the House said that Blair should pull out the British soldiers out of the war to avoid that many more of them get killed. However as this was not very well taken by the general public he backtracked and said that after all he "does not meant that the British soldiers should leave the battleground and leave Saddam Hussein off the hook". This reminded the u-turn made by Clare Short some time ago and in both cases it does not put both in a good light, as they do not seem to know what they want.
Both countries have rejected Donald Rumsfelt accusation that Syria and Iran have continued to supply Iraq with weapons despite the embargo on March 30, 2003. In particular the Syrian government is furious and maintain that Rumsfelt acted this way to try to hide the fact that the war strategy he imposed is going very badly. Elsewhere these accusations are seen as a possible prelude to the invasion of these two countries after the Iraq war is finally won. Iran's foreign minister rejected the USA accusations that it had deployed militants in Iraq, adding that his country was not taking side in this war.
In Iraq the population and many tribal chiefs seem to be on Saddam Hussein's side at the end of March 2003, many of which vow to fight to the death for their country and present regime. Baghdad also said that about 4,000 were ready to act as suicide bombers against the US and British forces and population. What must even looks stranger, especially in the USA, is the news that thousand of Iraqis living outside the country, among them 4,000 from Jordan, are leaving their jobs and moving back to Iraq to fight the aggressors.
At the end of March 2003, a Marine in California became the first American conscientious deserter of the war in Iraq. He said that he believed the war was "immoral because of the deception involved by our leaders". We will be sent to a court martial. The American peace movement is trying to regain some patriotic credentials in the USA as hostility to dissent against military action in Iraq intensifies. Dissenters are accused of anti-Americanism and are under pressure from a growing atmosphere of intolerance. The USA is not the land of freedom -of expression and more- as it proclaims to be, but the land of conformity and any deviation is banned.
US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, is coming to Europe for talk at the beginning of April 2003. He will first see the Turkish Prime Minister, Recip Tayyep Erdogan, hoping to convince him to let the supplies stored in Turkey be moved to northern Iraq. Afterwards he will go to Brussels for talks at NATO and the European Union. He will also talk to most foreign ministers of these two organisations trying to heal the rift between most of the continental countries and the USA. These ministers will ask him to involve fully the United Nations in the post war. It is already known that the American want to run Iraq as a protectorate after the war is over. And Colin Powell confirmed that those who participated in the war and paid for it -in money and blood- would run it after. He is ready to give the United Nations some limited participation. Personally I do not see it as so bad as long as the nations that were against the war do not pay for the reconstruction. This too is American and British responsibility.
A higher degree of intelligence integration was agreed at the beginning of April 2003 between the USA and Britain to reinforce the collaboration in the war to terrorism. The two countries are already collaborating closely in most area and this is just another step towards closer links. One wonders what Britain is doing in the EU?
On April 10, 2003, it was obvious to all people that the situation in Iraq was bad. Some Americans disagreed, among them Donald Duck (sorry, Rumsfeld) who said that there were only a few temporary disturbances in occupied Iraq. Everybody else saw anarchy, generalised lootings of government buildings, schools, hotels, hospitals, private homes, etc. This happens in all major cities including Baghdad, Basra, Kirkuk, Mosul, etc. Outside these big cities we do not know what happens. People are erecting barricades to defend their neighbourhood and their homes with guns. A few people have been murdered as old scores are settled. And all the time the American soldiers are just looking on, doing nothing because they are afraid they could be suicide bombers. It is a shame and nothing else because they ignore everything that does not affect them personally. The Americans now are saying that this state of disorder took them by surprise. They will never learn: it was the same in France, Germany, Belgium, etc at the end of the Second World War, the same in Korea, the same in Vietnam and the same in Afghanistan. When will they learn? At least the British recognise the problems and try to do what they can. They even shot to death five would be armed bank robbers in Basra and they are asking the members of the Iraqi police to come back to work and help them keep a minimum of order.
Fear of murders was shown to be real when a prominent Shia Muslim cleric was murdered on April 10, 2003,in the holy city of Najaf. Abdul Majid al-Khoei and another cleric were hacked to death in the Iman Ali mosque while trying to reach an agreement with the new authorities for the control of the shrine. It is not certain if they were killed by some Saddam's followers or by ordinary members of the mosque who disagreed with his suggestions. Abdul Majid al-Khoei, a moderate Shia, was the son of Ayatollah Sayed Abdul Qasim al-Kohei, leader of much of the Shia world until his death in 1992 under house arrest in Najaf. Khoei fled Iraq after the Shia upraising of 1991 and returned only last week from exile in London. The Americans were hoping he would have been able to help them reaching an agreement with the local clergy and assist in the formation of a new local government to replace the Baathist administration. He could be the first in a long line of murdered appeasers. At the same time Bush and Blair are appearing in television broadcast directed to the Iraqis with their words translated in Arabic. This is pure propaganda, of course, but it also aims to present their official views on the future of the country. Will they be believed is another question impossible to answer now?
On April 10, 2003, we were told that the CIA are searching the Interior Ministry in Baghdad in the hope of finding the secret archives of the Saddam regime more specifically any evidences of human right abuses and the development of weapons of mass destruction. There are now some rumours that Russian agents have been looking for these archives too. The Americans, of course, interpret this as a wish to prevent evidence of collusion between Russia and Iraq from falling in US hands. It is believed that Saddam Hussein, his sons and main collaborators are still in Iraq although there were some thoughts that they could have found refuge in the Russian Embassy in Baghdad -Russia denied this information- or in Syria and our Donald already threatened the Syrians if the dared give them asylum.
On April 12, 2003, the chaos continued in all the towns and cities taken over by the Americans. And the Iraqis are complaining loud and clear because nothing is done about it. The Americans destroyed the local administration, including the police, and left the streets to the looters. They say that they have not enough soldiers to finish the war and police the streets at the same time but probably they are too afraid to get into trouble and suffer some casualties. At the same time the future of Iraq, what it will become after the American occupation, is far from clear. And many Iraqis people are still afraid that Saddam Hussein, or at least the Ba'ath party, will soon be back in power after the Americans leave and they behave in consequence, not showing what they think.
Now on July 21, 2003, the USA officially admitted that the Iraq war started
in mid-2002 with intensive air strike under the excuse of enforcing the
southern no-fly zone over the country. This plan, Operation Southern Focus,
was launched last summer, before President Bush took the problem to the
UN, according to lieutenant General Michael Moseley, the chief allied war
commander. This raises further questions about the use of false intelligence
to justify war.