I think that the "left" (whatever that means these days) should concentrate on Israel and Palestine, for that is the real tinderbox, a bad situation that grows worse by the hour. Since Americans finance Sharon's murderous policies, and since a fair number of them resent it (for good and bad reasons), there is a tangible connection that can be referred to and dealt with. Iraq is too abstract, I'm afraid, for many Americans who see Saddam and little else. Plus, nothing, and I mean nothing the "left" does in the coming weeks is gonna do squat to prevent Bush from overthrowing Saddam. Let's just hope that when it happens, it comes through a coup where dissident officers slice Saddam's throat instead of an all-out US invasion, which could prove disastrous for the country and the region, especially if rebel groups inside Iraq are not included.
Check this from the Boston Globe:
"In early January, the State Department cut off funding for the Iraqi National Congress, declaring that the organization was unable to account for millions of dollars it had already received. After several weeks, the payments resumed as the organization promised to improve its accounting.
"The Iraqi National Congress enjoys substantial support in Congress and the Pentagon but is often treated with disdain by the State Department and CIA.
'' 'What I have seen in recent weeks is a desperate effort by opponents of the INC to find an alternative,' said Richard Perle, a former Reagan administration official who serves as chairman of the Pentagon's influential Defense Policy Board. ''I think it's foolish and short-sighted.'
Perle fears that the State Department and CIA efforts send a mixed message to the region. 'It seems to me very damaging, and it creates confusion,' he said.
The debate goes to the heart of a long-standing dispute over how to shape anti-Iraq policy, which has demonstrated few if any successes since the end of the 1991 Gulf War.
For years, the Iraqi National Congress - a nominal umbrella for the Iraqi opposition - has served as a centerpiece of US efforts to oust Hussein.
Its leader, Ahmed Chalabi, is seen in Washington as a charismatic and effective lobbyist. But within the fractious Iraqi opposition, he remains a divisive figure, derided by some detractors as autocratic and arrogant.
"The Iraqi National Congress and its US backers tout Chalabi as a potential leader of post-Hussein Iraq. But as a Shiite Muslim, like many of Hussein's opponents in southern Iraq, he is handicapped in recruiting officers from the army, which is dominated by Sunnis. His ties to the military are also limited by his long absence from Iraq: He left the country in 1958.
"A former defense official who monitored Iraq said: 'The INC has a fairly effective lobby around town and in certain circles in the Pentagon and certain members of Congress on the Republican side. But it has no standing whatsoever in the intelligence community or at State.'
"That view was echoed by Edward S. Walker, who oversaw the Middle East at the State Department during the Clinton administration.
'' 'The INC is incapable of doing anything. The INC is not representative of the broad opposition. The INC has been infiltrated by Iraqi intelligence by all reports that I have seen. And there's just a significant group of Iraqis in opposition who won't follow that lead,' he said."
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/070/nation/US_pursues_ex_generals_to_toppl e_Iraq_leader+.shtml
DP