Jon Read / Truthing.net – 2005-03-13 11:03:22

http://www.envirosagainstwar.org/edit/index.php?op=edit&itemid=2479

(March 11, 2005) — A first phase of a constructive and realistic peace plan for Iraq would be for all Coalition Forces to be repositioned as a military defensive buffer securing and defending the major oil assets.

A second phase would be to withdraw entirely when and if the Iraqi people form a representative government approved by the United Nations.

Faced with the prospect of the US holding the oil assets indefinitely, and possibly pocketing oil revenues to pay for the defensive buffer, the various Iraqi factions will most likely forgo civil war, form a representative government, and with the diplomatic support of the entire world community insist successfully that we leave.

This plan can be initiated immediately by the president without the concurrence of Congress, the U.N. or the present Iraqi government. A plan that hinges on cooperation between various entities is most times wishful thinking, and not a realistic proposal.

After consultation and agreement with other Coalition leaders, the president need only lift the phone, and as commander-in-chief, order the generals to reposition their forces.

However, this peace plan should ideally be announced by the present Iraqi government, and the U.S. should immediately comply with phase one. In this way, those who have sided with the Coalition will most likely avoid becoming “boat people,” as in Vietnam, and instead be hailed as patriots.

It is in the cities and on the highways where we are killing and being killed, not so much in the oil fields and at refineries.

The fact that detractors will say, “We knew it was about oil all the time and now here’s the proof,” is an advantage in that the most militant groups will be inclined to attack the buffer instead of each other.

Of course, to succeed they would have to mass troops and equipment and thus become vulnerable to our superior firepower. Something they, like the Viet Cong, would soon understand as foolhardy.

Since a civil war would most likely start with one group suspecting the other of planning a move on the oil assets, our holding the oil wealth of the country in trust (and putting oil revenues in an actual trust) reduces dramatically the temptation for civil war.

In effect, Iraq will have a non-violent civil war since the question of equitable resource distribution and other federalist type issues will have to be worked out eventually, whether we are underfoot or not.

If they want to fight each other instead, then the U.N. won’t approve the government, and we keep the oil. Some Iraqis will rightly resent this blatant extortion, but the many who risked their lives to vote, will prevail. A workable representative government will be formed. It will be approved by the U.N., and we will be forced to leave.

The plan allows President Bush, to claim victory in establishing a democratic presence in the Middle East, the Iraqis to achieve the liberation of their country and the U.N. to regain stature by holding the keys to our leaving.

Since the deployment is defensive, and a step toward total withdrawal, Coalition Forces could almost immediately be phased to a U.N. multi-national force, including contingents from nearby countries, thus allowing our troops to return home.

A smaller U.N. force could be stationed at one or more of our existing Iraqi military bases for a period of years in case a coup is attempted.

A true pacifist peace plan should leave all parties as virtual winners. However, the losers here will be U.S. corporations – those that planned on privatizing the utilities, resources and major enterprises of the country, and thus deprive Iraq of needed income. This sort of economic imperialism is, of course, what the Cuban revolution was about.

Okay, so as far as the corporations are concerned, which is to say the funders and leadership of both major parties, the plan isn’t perfect. It is however, as we landscape architects would say, “Perfect enough.” By the time of the next congressional races, the killing should have reached a point where progressive candidates can run on this genuine peace plan and win back the Congress.

Unless, of course, President Bush beats them to it. Obviously, the time for progressive candidates to step forward is NOW.

Jon J. Read may be reached at: (520) 293-9171, jonread@earthlink.net
http://www.truthing.net http://www.jonread.net