JPEG - 15.3 kb

George W. Bush may not be an eagle, but we must admit a remarkable sagacity for publicity in him. In only a few weeks, he has convinced the whole world (that is, the West, the only part of the planet that, although with difficulty, is within his horizon) that he is the winner of the elections in Iraq. He has also convinced his European allies of his good will towards them (after brutally slapping them in the face during his first tenure as president).

Indeed, the World “Independent” Mediatic Choir (WIMC), in its habitual submissiveness, told the world on January 31st that 8.5 million Iraqis, in defiance of terrorism, had voted; thus expressing their abidance for the democracy that had been provided to them by the U.S.. At that moment, the Iraqi war came to an end for the WIMC. Mission accomplished; democracy at last installed in the Arab nation. And thus the curtain fell over the electoral results, the counting of the votes, and the way the government is to be established, tasks that will be left to the U.S. embassy and to the “independent” Electoral Commission in charge of presiding over the celebration of the victory in the war against Sunni and Al Qaeda terrorism.

How Washington and its Iraqi acolytes will manage to rob the Shiites’ electoral victory in the south, and what will happen in the north, where the Kurds believed the promise of the Great American Father (of granting them the oil of Kirkuk and autonomy); is yet to be seen. But at the same time, the Great Father had promised Turkey not to allow the Kurds to install an autonomous entity in northern Iraq (since it would encourage the Turkish Kurds to do likewise, and then unite with the Iraqi Kurds).

And the reaction of the Sunnis, who in Baghdad, Falluja, Ramada, and several tens of cities did not vote, and who do not seem too enthusiastic about the great triumph of democracy, is also yet to be seen. Let us not forget that the Sunnis account for a total of 5 million well-armed and well-organized people.

But, what does all this matter?. The WIMC has already defined the information Western readers and TV viewers should see; the rest will be relegated to secondary informative channels in the Internet. After only two weeks, the WIMC accomplished another feat by explaining to us that Bush and Chirac, Bush and Schroeder and Bush and Zapatero, are once again in harmony, that everything, or almost all misunderstandings had been resolved, that euro-US relations had been reestablished as in the good days, etc.

Having taken for granted that the Iraqi war is over and in the files, it is now necessary to teach Iraqis how to run a nation, how to preserve order, how to refine oil, how to trade with the West, how to privatize, and so on.

And, as if by magic, with ample displays of smiles and reconciliatory declamations about the Euro-Atlantic reconciliation, the problems yet to be solved are swept under the rug. Bush and Chirac shake hands and put pressure on Syria for it to leave Lebanon immediately. Not by mere coincidence, is Syria designated as a scapegoat right after the Lebanese ex-prime minister Rafik Hairi is blown up in the “right” moment. And the whole WIMC makes its way through the flames of the explosion to blame Syria for all the iniquities perpetrated in the Arab world.

Are we about to witness a general reconciliation?. I think that it will last until it is clear that the emperor is preparing the next war. And it is doing so with prompt efficiency, aiming at Syria and Iran.

It is also an ephemeral reconciliation, since Europe has signed the Kyoto protocol, while Washington will not sign anything that might affect its immediate economic interests, which are based on an on-going growth of consumption. At the same time, this will sooner or later increase the U.S. foreign debt and, as a result, weaken the dollar, devaluating it in relation with the euro, thus leaving Europe and Japan (but not China) in charge of paying the bill of the war in Iraq and that of the next adventure.

Reconciliation will come to an end, when Europe fulfills its commitment of reducing subsidies for its farmers because -although late and clumsily- it has understood that its security depends on the balance of the world’s wealth, and that it is better for all that the farmers of Africa, Asia and Latin America have a decent living standard. But the U.S. will not yield and will continue subsidizing its agriculture.

Reconciliation will face another difficult challenge when the U.S. (or Israeli) bombers launch their missiles against the Iranian atomic facilities and Europe has to justify before its citizens, the stratospheric oil price increase and the difficulties they may have to go through to fill their gas tanks and even to turn on the heating in schools and hospitals.

Are these scenarios mere fantasies? We could spot them at first glance by just removing the folding screen that the WIMC places before us day after day.