In contrast, a long-term American presence would involve the US in all sorts of local, factional, communal and personal quarrels. Every time it took one side, another side would get angry. Those whom the US did not support would use demagoguery, Arab nationalism, Islamism, and anti-Americanism to promote their cause. If America promised too much or stayed too long, it could once again snatch political defeat from the jaws of military victory.
This is the most worrisome aspect of overthrowing Saddam.. And I think one of the reasons it seemed most attractive to bring the Hashemites into the picture, given their initial rule over this artificially created nation..
Either that, or the US will find itself being played by many different rival power clans, all seeking to dominate the others...
But since the US will be the main provider of financial and economic aid, it should give us sufficient leverage (bribery) to keep things quiet until a government is formed and stabilized.
But I must admit, I do find the Hashemite option rather attractive, as is likely they do as well.. With pressure to gradually democratize to follow once they have stabiized the region..
It sets in place a power rivalry between the Saudis and Hashemites, which will provide the US even more leverage in dealing with changes in the Wahhabi side.. And it prevents the Saudis from ever blackmailing us again..
Hawk |
