THE 30 JANUARY ELECTION is not what is made out. It is not so Washington could leave Iraq in safe hands. It is not to usher representative democracy in Iraq. It is not to prove democracy is inherently superior to dictatorship. It is not so Iraqis can order their lives in conditions better than President Saddam Hussein could ever provide. It is not so the united Iraq under American stewardship would be stronger and everlasting than under Baathist rule. It is not so an Iraqi in a democracy could live his life better than he could in a dictatorship. It is not to elect leaders who would rebuild what Washington destroyed to destroy Saddam. It is not to end the total terror which the terrorists and renegades inflicts as thoroughly as Washington on the Iraqi. Nor is it to prove that Islam is terror incarnate if Washington so decides. But what the 21st century's Anglo-Saxon Don Quixote, known the world over as President George W. Bush, and his side-kick, Sancho Pancho, British prime minister Tony Blair, wants for Iraq.

President Bush, in his second term, is in President Nixon's shoes. He has two years, when congressional and senate elections are next held, to sort the mess he started. The divided citizenry is not about to let go. That Osama bin Laden flexed his muscles towards the end of the presidential campaign to demand the American electorate re-elect the enemy he knows is no accident. He understands the American character well enough to be the enemy Saddam Hussein turned not to be. When I left the party, the two candidates were neck to neck, with Ohio in the balance. Mr Bush secured Ohio and the presidency. Globalisation's Idi Amin is now set to charm the world in his usual idiosyncratic way. His citizens I dare say in good time would react as Ugandans did in their time to their runaway leader. And that would leave Malaysia's Pavlovian dogs much upset indeed.

THE US IRAQ STUDY Group reported that the former Iraqi government, under President Saddam Hussein, alloted Malaysian prime minister, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, through a Malaysian company called Tradeyear, oil vouchers worth 2m barrels under the UN Oil-for-Food programme. Other Malaysian beneficiaries are a company controlled by a Sabah business man, the Malaysian petroleum giant, Petronas, a retired Malaysian ambassador, an Iraqi resident amongst others. This announcement came at an inconvenient time. Pak Lah had just called on Malaysian business men to eschew corruption as a way of life.

The government cannot fight corruption alone. All must join in, insist of ethical values and integrity. Or all will come to nought. Societies like the KLSTI works with the government to root out corruption. Pak Lah said what was expected of him. He went off to attend the ASEM meeting in Hanoi. It did not take long for his words to be challenged. The Iraq Survey Group, which for 18 months had investigated Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, found instead weapons of mass corruption. There were no WMD, they found, embarrassing the two totem poles who insist Saddam must be destroyed at any cost because they had. This report is causing political waves in the US and Britain. So, the spin moved sharply to what Saddam did with the UN oil-for-food programme, which allowed Baghdad to sell its oil to buy food for its people. The sanctions continued in the meanwhile, and the ISG, in its trawling of official documents, found countries and inviduals all over the world who allegedly benefited, for personal gain, by partaking in it. It provided the much need diversion from the political flak in London and Washington.

In Iraq, we only know that the war zone is along the corridor from Mosul in the north and Najaf in the south, less than a score of towns. We are led to believe that the rest of the country is pacified, or firmly in US-led control. Even what happens in the corridor is known for only what the US chooses to reveal or if journalists were there. But with reporters and cameramen forced to remain in their hotels because it is so dangerous outside, what they cover is spotty and disbelieved. No attempt is made, unlike in Vietnam, to find the truth beyond the official claims. It does not control the countryside. It cannot claim it does, for it does not even attempt to secure it, unlike in Vietnam where at least it tried. It biggest mistake was to assume that once the strong leader is removed – President Ngo Dinh Diem in South Vietnam, President Saddam Hussein in Iraq – and a client regime installed, all will be well. It found to its cost it could not be more wrong.

But it could not be sustained. The political and demographic realities ensured that this democratic government would not want the United States to hang on to Iraq as its linchpin to the control of the Middle East. It was yet another blow. The United States and Britain went to war in the confident expectation that President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass distraction. It did not matter if he did not. They needed an excuse to invade, and this was it. There was none. Then one by one it shifted away from its stated ideals as its own raison d'etre bit the dust. They hoped the Shias would welcome them with flowers; today, the Shia is more determined than the Sunnis to drive the United States out. The Sunnis deprived of power they enjoyed under Saddam Hussein did not take that kindly.

A TALE IS TOLD OF A Chinese emperor in ancient times so fearful he would be overthrown and killed that he systematically killed, and destroyed the families of, his real and perceived enemies, and later, the intellectuals, those whose word and deed could turn against him, those who had the implements with which they could, at a pinch, be used against him. The fear was so pervasive and destructive that the mandarins stepped in and asked his favourite mandarin to tell him that his paranoia put the throne at risk. He thought deeply and at length, and as the Emperor and he were walking in the royal gardens he espied a gardener at work. He turned to the Emperor and said: "Your Majesty, kill that man now!" The Emperor turned to him in surprise and asked why. "Sire," he replied, "that man has the implements of rape on him." Fast forward to the 21st century, and variations of the tale is played out in London and Washington in their decision to invade Iraq. President Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, was a danger to the world, had to be destroyed. He did not have, but he could, at a pinch, acquire them. So they had to destroy him and the state he ruled. Like the Chinese emperor, President George Bush and the British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, had to destroy their presumed enemies. Like in China then, both now find their explanations unaccepted, seek a plausible reason to insist they are right, so far without success.

WHEN A CENTURY AGO, CHINESE agents seized the rebel leader, Dr Sun Yat-sen, as he walked past the Chinese Legation in Portland Place, London, and held him captive in it, he managed to throw a scribbled plea for help on a scrap of paper out of this third floor prison. A priest picked it up, alerted the newspapers, questions were asked in the House of Commons, and his arrest soon became a cause celebre. The Legation called a press conference to insist Dr Sun is a prisoner and would be tried in China. This raised a political furore. The head of the Legation tetchily replied: "He will get a fair trial in China. First the trial, then the execution." The British Government stepped in. That saved Dr Sun, who went on to overthrow the monarchy a decade later. What the United States want to do with Mr Saddam Hussein is no different from China's over Dr Sun. When the Malaysian Prime Minister, Dato' Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, demands a free trial for Mr Saddam, he conveniently forgot the injustice to his own Saddam or Sun - his predecessor, Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim, rotting in jail by the same judicial standards the US wants in Iraq to try Mr Saddam and China for Dr Sun.

HUBRIS BRINGS THE UNITED States, with a little help from the United Kingdom, to its knees in Iraq. It manufactured a crisis, ignored the United Nations, believed it could defy the world, invaded Iraq with little understanding of the country and its culture, sure that it would be welcomed with open arms and flowers from a grateful nation that could not wait to rid the ogre in its midst, Mr Saddam Hussein. It had might on its side and, as the sole superpower, no rivals. When the first salvo was fired, officials in Washington could not believe their good fortune. The mighty Iraqi army disappeared into the Iraqi desert and countryside, the country was firmly under its control, although its optimistic forecasts based on arrogance and belief that no power on earth could stop them from its civilisational mission. It was the Crusades no less. The Christian powers would subdue the Muslim yet again. President Bush, we are told misused the world when discussing the conflict with Muslim nations, but it was far from his mind even now.

Pak Lah (1364)   United States (636)   Straits Times (412)   Samy Vellu (224)   Putra Jaya (200)   Chief Justice (200)   Saddam Hussein (188)   Vincent Tan (164)   Civil Service (154)   Parti KeADILan (148)   Islamic State (118)   Johore Bahru (100)   Sungei Buloh (94)   Bukit Tinggi (88)   Abdul Razak (80)   Pengkalen Pasir (68)   Ting Pek (64)   Armed Forces (59)   Soviet Union (58)

Malay Dominance (58)   Yong Teck (56)   Hong Kong (56)   Human Rights (56)   Syed Hamid (54)   Puteri UMNO (52)   Islam Hadhari (52)   Royal Commission (51)   Hussein Onn (51)   Rafidah Aziz (48)   Indian Congress (48)   Open House (44)   Vision Schools (44)   Shah Alam (44)   Malay Unity (42)   Chua Jui (42)   Abdul Taib (42)   Ampang Jaya (36)   Ras Adiba (36)

Osama Bin Laden (36)   Nik Aziz Nik (20)   Ling Liong Sik (18)   Lee Kuan Yew (18)

High Court Judge (14)   Wan Azizah Wan (9)   Lim Kit Siang (9)   Megat Junid Megat (8)

Mahathir (2960)

Anwar (2399)