|
Other Priorities — War on Terrorism and Middle East Conflict —
Are Pressing
Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer spoke of his opposition to a possible
US attack on Iraq in light of the pressing goals of fighting international
terrorism and resolving regional conflicts, in an interview with the Flensburger
Tageblatt newspaper on August, 28, 2002.
(translated excerpts)
Flensburger Tageblatt: On foreign policy: the
danger of a military strike by the United States against Iraq is increasing.
What is the probability of such an attack in your view?
Fischer: I can't make a judgement on that. However, I
regard an attack on Iraq with the goal of changing its regime as a highly
risky and false move. Let me not be misunderstood: the United States is
crucial as a factor of global political stability. But Iraq does not pose
an acute threat to international security at the moment. I set other priorities
here. Our principal aims remain the fight against international terrorism
and the resolution of regional conflicts such as in the Middle East and
between Pakistan and India.
Flensburger Tageblatt: The declared aim of
the United States is to overthrow Saddam Hussein. UN demands for weapons
inspections no longer play any sort of role for it.
Fischer: Exactly, which is why we are talking about two
different things. If there is an attack which is solely for the purpose
of changing the regime, the United States will be assuming responsibility
for peace and stability in the entire region. That is an extremely difficult
task that can only be dealt with successfully in the long term. There
are huge risks in this. The position of the Federal Government is clear:
we want solidarity in the fight against terror, but no adventures. And
I see so many question marks over war to bring about a change of regime
in Baghdad that I am filled with deep scepticism and must register my
opposition.
Flensburger Tageblatt: Would it be at all possible
to contain such a conflict?
Fischer: The use of weapons would be limited geographically.
But the Middle East is a region that directly neighbours Europe. If that
region reaches crisis point or explodes, then we will be directly affected.
That is my main worry.
Flensburger Tageblatt: But this obviously doesn't
concern the US Administration. There would be a substantial shift in the
region's geopolitical situation. What plans does the international community
have to bring peace to the crisis region following the possible end of
the Saddam era?
Fischer: That's the vital question. What comes after?
But there has so far been no answer to this question even from the Americans.
Flensburger Tageblatt: What particular role
can Germany play in the Arab world?
Fischer: In the first place, there can only be a German
foreign policy that is integrated within a European foreign and security
policy. Beyond that, Germany, for historical reasons, has a special relationship
with Israel. But just as Israel has a right to exist, the Palestinian
people have the legitimate right to a democratic state of their own. We
are in a position that makes us a credible interlocutor for both sides.
Flensburger Tageblatt: Do you still regard
Arafat as a partner you can talk to?
Fischer: You cannot choose your partners – on either
side. What is important is that we are talking about very serious conflicts.
To me it is essential not only to talk about political goals but also
to act. In this respect, not enough value is attached to the Arab League
Summit. We must not let up in our efforts towards peace in the Middle
East – especially now that it is slowly becoming clear to both sides
that a military option cannot work. It only leads to a war of attrition
which ends up nowhere. There can be only one solution in a struggle over
the same country: a historic compromise. I regret that there has to be
so much suffering and terrible loss of life before this happens. But in
my view, we are on the way, an arduous one, to achieving a breakthrough
in this process and towards changing the whole strategic situation in
the Near and Middle East.
|