President George Bush’s desire, stated in his televised address, to retain a long term military presence in Iraq to create and stabilize a permanent ally of the United States is likely to make Americans less secure over time.
That insecurity will come not just from Al Qaeda, which has repeatedly vowed to push the US out of the region and will not hesitate to orchestrate massive attacks on the US homeland. It may also come from various State powers in the area.
Obviously, Iran and Syria will respond negatively, while Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt eye the situation with varying degrees of undercertainty and trepidation. Other countries may also get involved, albeit with greater caution and circumspection, including Russia, China, Pakistan, the Central Asian republics and to some extent India.
A temporary adventure in Iraq, for whatever reasons, is one thing. A permanent military presence is quite another because it upsets the long-term balance of power. It may also waken sleeping demons buried in the historical memories of many of the area’s nations.
An American presence in the region does not come alone. Behind the US is the entire NATO alliance, bound to it by binding collective security treaties. This alliance is composed of Western powers, several of whom dominated and exploited many non-Western civilizations for centuries. Its only non-Western member, Turkey, is a former imperial power whose empire lasted over 600 years.
Almost the entire region from the Mediteranean to the Pacific, was once ruled extensively by various Western powers, then led by Britain as the West’s top power. A permanent US presence in Iraq may be read by some in those areas as presaging another long shadow of Western influence now lead by US, currently the West’s top power.
In the past Britain and other Western powers acted alone in most cases. Now the US may act alone but it is always underpinned by the entire West against outright military defeat or military attack on its homeland.
Of course, there is no question that new colonies may be built once again by the West spreading outwards from the heart of the Middle East. But historical memories are burned into the genes of human beings. No country West of Suez will take lightly a permanent heavily armed US military presence in Iraq, supported by a local regime dependent on the US. Nobody will say anything out loud, but all will work gradually to secure themselves against further expansion of US military power East of Iraq.
Undoubtedly, the US is currently the world’s uncontested supreme military and economic power. But a Gulliver should not disregard Lilliputeans. Every major empire through history fell on hard times because of small enemies snapping relentlessly at its fringes.
South Korea is sometimes named as the model for a possible long-term US military presence in Iraq. The situation is not comparable. The Korean war was fought at a different time just after the catastrophies of the Second World War when two powerful new non Western powers – the Soviet Union and China—were rising up.
In any event, that presence was part of the defence of a defeated and disarmed Japan standing eyeball to eyeball with the Soviets and the Chinese, both of whom had ambitions of becoming military Super Powers.
The situation regarding South Korea and Taiwan may be stable and has remained safe for over 50 years, but in no year since that time has China ceased expanding its military might. Currently, each turn and twist of the security relationship in that region among the US, China, Japan, Russia, North Korea, South Korea and Taiwan is closely watched. It cannot be termed peace in the sense that peace reigns in Europe. All participants still walk a tightrope despite the many safety nets to avoid a conflagration.
Long-term US military intrusion in the Middle East, founded on a mainly Shiite-ruled Iraq used as a satellite, is hardly likely to end up being as stable as the South Korea situation. Without doubt, Iran will acquire a nuclear weapon. Even if America bombs Iran in coming months and delays that process for another decade, its presence on Iran’s frontiers is hardly likely to be swallowed passively by the fiercely nationalist and pitiless Mullahs.
To install itself as a citizen of the region, the US would have to depose the Mullahs and destroy them sufficiently to make their return to power impossible. That is by no means an easy task in a fervently religious state populated by people fearful of their historical Sunni enemies now protected by the US. Especially so, in the light of Washington’s incompetent performance in Afghanistan and Iraq over the past five years.
If Mr. Bush’s televised intentions are bluster, his advisors are being reckless. If he is serious, the implications are sinister and could destablize all of the Near East, Middle East, West Asia and South Asia for decades to come.