#4
Nikolai Zlobin: Winning the Diplomatic Battle
Nikolai Zlobin, Director of Russian and Asian programs, Center for Defense Information, Washington DC.
Newspaper FederalPost (Moscow).
www.federalpost.ru
March 12, 2003

When Baghdad began destroying its "Al-Samoud II" missiles, the US lost all traces of a pretense to begin military action against Iraq. It might seem like Saddam's regime has proven more adroit at global diplomacy than Washington. But Nikolai Zlobin, director of Russian and Eurasian programs at the Center for Defense Information in Washington DC, told FederalPost that in his opinion, the US has won the ideological battle.

Zlobin agreed that Iraq has confounded the war ideologues, but noted that Saddam has also brought into question the entire traditional system of conflict resolution and the entire infrastructure of international institutions that have existed since the end of the Second World War. From the viewpoint of pure diplomacy, Americans stand to gain from this development, because they are in the best position to dictate the changing nature of international mechanisms.

Moreover, "three years ago no one spoke about destroying an axis of evil or the war on international terrorism," said Zlobin, while today this American agenda has become a global one, a shift that he sees as another important diplomatic success for the US.

The situation has also put into question the effectiveness of the UN. "Russia, a country whose economy is half the size of Portugal, has the right of veto in the Security Council while Japan, the world's second-largest economy, does not," said Zlobin.

"Americans have come to the conclusion that it is impossible to completely defend themselves from terrorism with the current methods, so instead of the old system, which is designed for a policy of defense and counterstrikes, they have suggested a doctrine of first strike as a pre-emptive measure." Here, Zlobin added, problems surfaced in regards to the definition of a potential foe, but more importantly, "a door has been opened, and a discussion that wouldn't have been possible even five years ago has begun."

Iraq, Zlobin emphasized, is buckling under the great force of US pressure. On March 11, General Richard Myers, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stated at a briefing that Pentagon has assembled over 225,000 troops for a potential military action against Iraq, and there is a continued gathering of forces who are ready, if necessary, to disarm the country.

But the issue has become much wider than disarmament, said Zlobin. "The US understands that the Persian Gulf region and the Asian countries are the core threat to global security, and will continue to be so for another half-century, and that's why the region needs to be stabilized. Iraq is a convenient place for that, and the key to global stability," said Zlobin.

After the UN Security Council vote, Bush will make an ultimatum to Saddam, in which he will demand an immediate disarmament and fulfillment of all past UN resolutions. To legitimize a regime change, said Zlobin, it is necessary to shore up international support, and the request to disarm will be put forward precisely because it already has that support.

At this time, 52 of Iraq's 120 short-range ballistic missiles, whose destruction the UN demands, have already been dismantled, but Zlobin emphasized that there is still a casus belli: "Saddam has shown that he is not planning to disarm; he opens his inventories under pressure, but he must destroy all forbidden weapons, not play a cat-and-mouse game with the inspectors."

The difference in the American and European approaches, Zlobin said, is that "the Europeans look at the process, at Iraq's willingness to cooperate, while the US demands the fulfillment of the resolution, looking at the end result."

Moreover, Zlobin said, the US is counting on the support of countries who must now, for various reasons, play diplomatic games, but the majority of them are on America's side, and "not one Arab country is defending Saddam."

It is necessary to keep in mind, said Zlobin, that there is a constant campaign of disinformation and leaks from military and diplomatic agencies. It's important for the US to attack Saddam when he least expects it. The most important thing is that Russia is not strategically diverging with the US on the issue. They may have differences about tactics, but there is also a common understanding of issues like global security and international terrorism.

Russia considers Iraq as a "temporary problem, one that will not stand in the way of a partnership between Russia and the US," and "partners may make mistake and then move past them." In the meanwhile, Zlobin says, Russia must ensure its security in a global context, and can do so only with the help of the US. Staying on America's side after Iraq, Russia can then propose its agenda and strategy of cooperation.

Translated by Seva Gunitskiy

BACK TO THE TOP    #248 CONTENTS    NEXT ARTICLE