Iran’s terms for help in Iraq

TO BE ABLE to help the Untied States in dealing with its “misadventure” in Iraq, Iranian President Mahmud Ahmadinejad wants Americans to stop bullying Tehran. This is indeed a fair and just demand. One cannot expect a foe against whom the US Administration is holding out, day in and day out threats, of using its military power to be so magnanimous as to come forward and assist Americans in getting out of the Iraqi quagmire. The Bush Administration has all along been hostile towards Tehran even much before Tehran publicly announced its decision to go ahead with its uranium enrichment programme to meet its power requirements.
The Iranian leader while talking to the Basij parliamentary group declared the “Iranian nation is ready to help you (Americans) in getting out of the quagmire on condition that you resume behaving in a just manner and avoid bullying and attacking”. The Bush Administration is already under tremendous pressure at home to open up diplomatic channels with Damascus and Tehran after former Secretary of State James A. Baker committee recommended to involve Syria and Iran in addressing the Iraqi question. Iran and Syria, termed by Bush Administration, as “rogue” states are next-door neighbours of strife- torn Iraq where sectarian violence and war of resistance against presence of foreign troops led by the United States are taking an enormous toll. Iraq continues to burn and bleed with mounting ferocity. While hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian, security personnel and troops have already perished, the American troops continue to lose their soldiers in increasing numbers every day.
Iraq war has entered a stage where American public feels it is time for its troops to pull out before it is too late. Bush Administration is desperately searching for an exit route. It is only the Iranian and Syrian Governments which can help in the crisis. Of course, once the foreign troops pull out, civil war amongst disparate guerrilla groups would surely start but there is a likelihood that they will eventually settle for peace. Post-American bloodbath can not be avoided but if Iraq is left to Iraqis, they will realize the need for preserving Iraqi sovereignty. A break-up of the oil rich state could be avoided. Already, Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) has issued an appeal to Iraq’s fighting factions to stop bloodshed. This appeal will remain a far cry as long as foreign troops are present in the war-torn land. May be, sectarian violence is created by those foreign elements who wish to hang on.
President Ahmedinejad only demands US Administration to abandon its hostile and militant posture. The use of force has already dragged Americans into a purposeless war which they can not win. For the sake of peace and to arrest bloodshed, US Government should welcome Iranian offer and respond positively.
 

Cease-fire in Gaza

It is about time a cease-fire comes into force in Gaza. Since June, Israeli troops have run roughshod over this territory and its people, disregarding international pleas to stop the siege and the carnage. During these six months, Israel killed more than 400 Palestinians in Gaza, roughly half of them civilians. During the same period only three Israeli soldiers died. The huge disparity in casualties can never stand up to the Israeli explanation that they went into Gaza looking for one abducted soldier; it was much more than that. Israel was hell-bent on grinding down the Palestinians, to the point where they would be at Israel’s mercy, that they would agree to, in fact would desire, any peace settlement that would spare Palestinian blood. And, of course, it would be a deal not at all resembling the just, fair and comprehensive settlement the Palestinians deserve.
In the face of such an onslaught, which includes the 19 family members killed in the Beit Hanoun massacre, Palestine President Mahmoud Abbas has done admirably to win a commitment from all Palestinian factions to stop attacks on Israel, which led to yesterday’s truce. Abbas’ ability to persuade these factions that negotiations were still the only way to solve the conflict, put paid to doubts observers and Abbas’ own people had that he had the influence to enforce a cease-fire among Palestinian groups that see no other course other than to continue the armed struggle.
In the wake of the wanton death and destruction in Gaza, nobody would have blamed Hamas and Islamic Jihad had they told Abbas they would not abide by any cease-fire. That they agreed to a cessation of the fighting is not just a measure of Abbas’ powers of persuasion but sincere acknowledgement from Palestinian of all hues that they want peace, not a conflict.
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has also agreed to halt hostilities and to pull out Israeli troops from Gaza. Olmert need not be thanked. The truth is Israel had no business returning to Gaza after Israel withdrew from it last year. There is no such thing as a withdrawal from occupied territory, then a return to it whenever you like and for whatever reason. Israel made a strategic decision to leave Gaza after 38 years in the territory, and an easy one with only about 8,000 Israeli settlers that had to be removed compared to the more than 300,000 settlers in the West Bank.
What is striking about this cease-fire is that nothing yet of the outstanding issues between the two sides has been resolved. The whereabouts and fate of the kidnapped Israeli soldier remain unknown. More importantly, the truce comes even though a Palestinian national unity government has not yet been formed. It is highly doubtful Olmert would have agreed to a cease-fire if he was not certain a unity government that would recognize Israel in one form or another was approaching soon. Such a government will also hopefully lead to the West lifting the crushing economic sanctions against the Palestinians, and the resumption of peace talks. Such are the many significant measures that yesterday’s Gaza cease-fire could affect.

—Arab News