Nothing can stop the countdown to war. That seems to be the prevailing attitude in Washington. What is it George W. Bush knows that the rest of the world is unaware of? Or conversely, why is Bush deaf to the reports of the weapons inspectors who are leaving no stone in Iraq unturned? Why does he remain bent on attacking Iraq in the face of overwhelming world opinion?
Bush’s inattention on the day of the latest report by Hans Blix was telling. While the entire world was glued to their television sets listening to the report of the UN weapons inspectors, which they believed would play a decisive role in the Iraq crisis, Bush was telling a gathering that his fight against terrorism included not only Al-Qaeda but also Saddam Hussein.
While Blix was reporting that his inspectors had found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction, Bush was saying that Saddam has these weapons.
And while Blix told the world that the inspections are working and Iraq is cooperating, Bush said Saddam was concealing his weapons of mass destruction from the world.
So who was doing the inspecting: George W. Bush or Hans Blix?
Both these speeches took place at different venues, but their contradictions seemed almost orchestrated.
Pope John II in his meeting with Tariq Aziz of Iraq said, “A US attack on Iraq is a defeat for humanity.” Should he not therefore talk to a representative of the country that is willing to concede defeat? But who, at a time like this, could be called a representative of the US? The huge crowd who participated in the New York peace rally feel certain that they represent the feelings of the majority of US citizens. Whom then does Bush represent?
Arab News Features 13 March 2003