Is ousting Saddam Hussein from power an act that would anger Arab States and provoke the masses in the region? If such a question is serious, the answer in fact is that nothing of the kind would happen.
There is nobody who would shed a single tear if Saddam were removed from power. The fear is that Saddam will not be removed and so the tragedy will continue on into the unforeseeable future.
Many had tried to scare us with what "Arab public opinion" would do in case Osama Bin Laden was attacked. But most Arabs spent the early evenings in Ramadan, when Bin Laden was being bombed, watching the Egyptian TV series "Al-Haj Metwali" which dealt with the issue of polygamy. It was said then that Ramadan evenings would bring fierce battles but they did not occur.
In fact, there is nobody who is willing to extend a lifeline to the Iraqi regime for one simple reason. The regime has demonstrated no interest in being helped by others. It is evident that its sympathizers and conspirators, including neutral forces, have failed to help it during the past decade. This is simply due to the regime’s reluctance to take a positive attitude and move forward.
Moreover, as the crisis concerns the Iraqi regime more than any other country, the regime failed to understand the world around it and also failed to realize its own interests. For instance, when the US launched its war against terrorism, many parties in Washington called for striking Iraq and removing the regime, precisely as was happening with the Taleban. Interestingly, Iraq’s traditional allies didn’t denounce those parties but a defense did come from Saudi Arabia’s former Intelligence Head. Iraq has no relationship with the Al-Qaeda or with Bin Laden: Iraq had no role in the Sept. 11attacks and in fact Al-Qaeda considers that Saddam is not a Muslim. These were the words of Prince Turki Al-Faisal, Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence head. In addition, Prince Turki said that those who wanted to believe that Iraq was responsible for the September attack are in fact seeking a pretext for attacking Iraq.
The statements by Prince Turki did not appear in an Arab newspaper but in The New York Times so that Washington could not possibly miss it or its significance. Someone may ask about Baghdad’s reaction to the Saudi position or how it sees the defense which did not come from a friend. Baghdad’s reaction was clear in the reaction of Taha Yassin Ramadan, Iraq’s No.2 in power. In a TV interview, he attacked the Saudis. His statements in that TV interview surprised many observers but not those who are familiar with the Iraqi regime and its policies. In fact, this is more evidence that Iraq is incapable of changing its bad attitude or respecting the minimum level of relations with others.
I would not be surprised if Washington manages to remove Iraq’s regime or its head as it did in Afghanistan. At such a time, we will see many of Iraq’s lovers changing their attitudes and positions. The problem with the Iraqi regime is that it can’t change its attitude in support of terrorism and its operations among the Kurds are one example. The Iraqi regime, moreover, will not cease threatening its neighbors as is evidenced by the rocket strikes on Kuwait a few days before Sept. 11. Nor will it listen to those who try to be honest on international issues. In fact, there is general agreement in the Arab world that if the removal of the Iraqi regime would end the crises in the region, it would be better done sooner rather than later. Iraq must understand that it has already used its weapons, bribes and friends and all that is left is for it to change its attitude or to be changed.
