With US Secretary of State Colin Powell pulling in one direction over Iraq and Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld pulling in another, it is not surprising that there is talk of disarray in the Bush administration. But it is almost certainly more apparent than real. Many of the ostensible differences should be laid at the feet of the media — American and international — keen to make as much out of the story as it can. Powell has, from the first days of the Bush administration, been seen as a dove compared to the hawkish Rumsfeld and Cheney — the latter incidentally must count as one of the most influential and active vice presidents ever — and the media have delighted in making the contrast. It makes good coverage, even if it is not wholly true. In the final event, however, it is Cheney and Rumsfeld who have Bush’s ear; theirs are the views that drive US foreign policy. And that view is: what is needed is a regime change in Baghdad.
Far more difficult to unravel is what the Russians are up to as regards Iraq. Where does their apparent sympathy for Baghdad fit into President Putin’s supposed common platform with George Bush on anti-terrorism?Last month, Moscow agreed a $40-billion trade pact with Iraq. Now, following a visit there by Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, his Russian counterpart Igor Ivanov has hinted that Russia will veto any military action against Iraq if the matter comes up before the UN Security Council. If a veto is Russia’s intention, then one thing is for sure: the US will make sure that the issue is not discussed any further at the UN. It will insist, as it already does, that the UN has already issued its demand — that arms inspectors be allowed back unconditionally to Iraq — and that if this continues to be resisted, the regime can be changed.
In fact, Russian rumors may simply be a ploy. Although President Putin is intent on restoring Russian political influence in the world and pursuing a foreign policy geared to its own interests, it will not be at the expense of opening a breach with the US — which a UN veto would certainly do. Moreover, Russia is not concerned about saving Saddam Hussein’s hide. What it wants is to safeguard its economic interests in the country. It wants to be paid the billions of dollars it is owed for arms and oil-equipment sales. It would also like to think that once the situation returns to normal there it is going to be rewarded with the lion’s share of reconstruction projects as well as developing new oilfields. These two reports — the trade deal and the might-be veto — may well be a ploy to force the US to agree that a post-Saddam Hussein Iraq will be in Russia’s economic sphere of influence. For his part, Bush may well agree to it.
Certainly there is no way that Moscow is going to put its ties to Baghdad over and above its relationship with Washington. There is too much too lose. It is quite happy to needle the US over Iraq in the same way that the Bush administration criticized Russia’s air raid last month against Chechen rebels based in Georgia (which in any event was intended largely as a comfort factor to the Georgians) but that is about as far as it goes.
Russians have always been good at chess. They are playing again, with Iraq as a pawn on the board.
