The world in a receptive position

The world is frozen in a receptive position and wonders how the United States will satisfy its ardor. Colin Powell spoke at an open session of the UN Security Council on the situation in Iraq with “foreplay,” i.e. with a report containing evidence of Iraq's guilt in everything that the United States accuses this country of.

Now it depends on the consent of the UN whether everything will happen “by consent” - and then the UN can be considered a servant of America - or “not by consent”. In the second case, the openly raped UN can be “not considered” at all.

The first option is much more profitable for the UN, since accusations of excessive helpfulness are not new for this organization. The strange thing is that the UN suddenly began to resist. More precisely, not the UN, but Europe. It is quite possible to assume that Europe, represented by the main European powers, decided to go on the “warpath”, even when it introduced the euro. And it is possible that the current military activity of the United States is a response precisely to the European “war,” or more precisely, to a fig taken out of one’s pocket .

Hussein, thus, turned out to be a boy for a demonstrative flogging, and an ideal boy at that: The States have something to show Europe (like, little depends on you, not like us); The United States has something to show Russia (you have no allies in the Middle East, take it to heart); Finally, the United States is showing the oil powers a virtual bin Laden, whom they are ready to look for in any oil-producing country - just as they once joyfully looked for Russian money in Swiss banks.

The UN in this sense obviously plays the same role as Iraq: it is hardly a question of demonstrating the strength of the UN as a whole. Strength is demonstrated to Europe (more precisely, France and Germany), the Middle Eastern "oil workers" and, partly, Russia.

Israel also acts as a “whipping boy” in all this mess, only it will be Hussein, not Bush, who will beat it. Israel, however, has a consolation: it will not only be beaten. Russia, cautiously, hints at its pro-American position by helping not America, but Israel ; Iraq will indicate its anti-American position in a similar (but opposite) way - by shooting at Israel, and not at the Americans. This is quite possible. Moreover, it should be noted that by striking Israel, Saddam will provide a considerable service to the Americans: if he does have weapons of mass destruction and foolishly uses them against Israel, and not against the American army, the Americans will only be happy: two less problems...

On the other hand, in this case, the effect of the demonstration of force will weaken: after all, now Bush is acting directly according to Carl Schmitt: by arbitrarily declaring a state of emergency , in which the norms of (international) law become irrelevant, Bush, thereby asserting his own sovereignty - on a global scale . If Iraq does have weapons of mass destruction, America will only act as a good Stalinist pioneer who disarmed the “spy” - to the light applause of the world community. As a result, the rape of the world will turn into an innocent love affair, and the “post-Yalta order” will continue to drag out its ephemeral existence.

Therefore , in no case should the Americans, if they start this war, fabricate evidence that they are right . The true truth lies not in the weapons that can be found on Saddam, but in the weapons that the Americans themselves will use in this war.

Kirill Yakimets