I've been thinking long and hard about this war and trying to see what future awaits us through the haze of battles and rhetoric. Here in Kuwait, we're in the extra-delicate position of trying to balance our belonging to the Arab World with our own security interests. Agitators of all stripes (Islamist, leftist, etc.) across the Middle East are branding us as traitors, with some even calling for Kuwait to be bombed for acting as the launching ground for the coalition forces "invading" Iraq. No doubt the 15 (and counting) missile attacks we've had to endure have given these fools something to celebrate. Our only consolation is that after this war is won by the coalition and Iraqis are freed from Saddam's evil grip, there will be a huge outbreak of "foot-in-mouth disease" across the Middle East as these same agitators struggle to eat their words and try to make amends to the Iraqi people for protesting against the war that set them free.

However... I have to come clean and admit that if I belonged to another Arab county, say Egypt or Lebanon, my feelings toward this war would very likely be very different. I can't honestly blame Arabs for having their passions inflamed at the thought of war wrought on another Arab country, and by relentless images of death and destruction beamed at them day and night courtesy of Al-Jazeera and other news channels. It is through tough times like these that all rational thought flies out the window. Why, for instance, can't everyone take a step back and examine the root causes of this mess? Why can't anyone acknowledge the hundreds of thousands killed by Saddam's regime? Are they making up for their long silence while he slaughtered his population for three decades by suddenly showing concern for the "Iraqi people"? Where was that concern before?! Or as my cousin Abdul-Latif put it in his column today: "Are the Arabs upset that the coalition is liberating the very people they ignored?" The sad truth is they didn't care before.. but not for the reasons one might expect. You see, most Arab countries are milder versions of Saddam's Iraq. Their citizens are used to this sort of life albeit on a smaller scale, so when anyone gets worked up over Saddam's brutality they simply shrug it off. Only last night on Lebanon's LBC channel, a female Lebanese lawyer called into a chat show and hailed the Iraqi people and their great leader(!!). It's one thing to express support for the Iraqi people - as we all do - but quite another to cheer their leader. How on earth could she hail the people and the leader who's slaughtering them in one breath?! This woman had better hope nobody in Iraq caught her tirade, because after the war they will hunt her down!

Of course - you've read/heard this ad nauseam - the main reason this war is so vehemently opposed in the Arab world is because - you guessed it - it's driven solely by the "evil USA", the "Great Satan", and looking at America's track record in the region would give anyone the "jitters", to say the least. As far as Arabs are concerned, America's refusal to act as an honest broker in the Palestinian/Israeli conflict gives them no reason to trust its intentions in this war. They view the coalition as invading imperialists aiming to occupy an Arab country and suck its resources dry. I reject the "War against Islam" arguement, since anyone with half a brain can see that it can't be a "crusade" when even the Pope objects to it so loudly (unless it's a "Born-Again Christian" crusade, in which case... run for the hills!!). People have selective memories for better or worse; it's human nature. Why can't they acknowledge America's role in rescuing Kosovo's Muslim population from Serbian aggression?Why wasn't that seen as a "crusade"?

And let us not discount George W. Bush's failure to inspire any Arab confidence in his declared intentions. The lack of consistency in his stated objectives - one day it's regime change, the next disarmament - must surely arouse suspicion in even the most pro-American of Arabs. A close look at his advisors also gives Arabs plenty of reasons for alarm and suspicion. From Donald Rumsfeld's ties to Saddam in the 1980's to the group of rabidly pro-Likud neo-consrvative chicken-hawks led by Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith et al. currently driving this war. And before any of you out there scream "ANTI-SEMITISM!!" let me warn you that my several Jewish friends will come kick your ass if you do. These advisors are certainly entitled to their views and they can support anyone from Israel to Greenland for all I care, but it shows a glaring contempt for the Arab world to have them advise on mideast policy and advocate war. Bush's speeches of late have concentrated on the liberation of the Iraqi people, a truly admirable goal which - if meant sincerely and done right - would eventually turn Bush into a hero - at least in Iraq. But then we turn around and see who he's lined up to administer Iraq after the war, whatever that means, and it just makes us pull our hair! How could Bush appoint a man so pro-Israel to this crucial and highly sensitive position? I'm not begrudging Mr. Garner his views - he's free to support whoever he likes - but someone with his outlook is unfit to administer Iraq and could only cause further trouble.

I could go on and on... but I really should get back to work now, so I'll pick up this discussion later.