Bu-lat-lat (boo-lat-lat) verb: to search, probe, investigate, inquire; to unearth facts

Volume 3,  Number 22               July 6 - 12, 2003            Quezon City, Philippines

Join the Bulatlat.com mailing list!

Powered by groups.yahoo.com

Special Forces 'Prepare for Iran Attack'

By Robert Fox
The Evening Standard

Back to Alternative Reader Index   

A Third World Country Can Still Defeat a US Military Aggression, Argues German Sociologist

Saturday, May 10 (RHC) -- In an essay entitled The military lesson of Iraq, German sociologist Hienz Dietrich denies that the United States military machine is so overwhelmingly powerful that there is nothing that smaller, undeveloped nations can do to defend themselves against it if attacked. The renowned academic argues that a small but well- organized, unified nation with enough weapons and a truly committed leadership can militarily defeat a US aggression.

In his essay, published in Granma newspaper Friday, Dietrich gives a thorough analysis of the war in Iraq, rejecting in so doing, the interpretation that the relatively easy US victory in the conflict should lead the world, notably the Third World, to believe that the US war machine is unbeatable and that, therefore, it is useless to resist the instatement of what he terms "a new Fascist project through the Washington-London-Tel Aviv axis."

Dietrich argues that although the most recent wars have made evident the terrible power of destruction of new armaments, they have revealed, at the same time, a number of weaknesses in the US war machine. He groups those weaknesses or limitations into four areas that he considers key for the outcome of any war the United States may seek to wage: the economic, the media, the political, and the military areas.

In the economic field, the German scholar asserts that macroeconomic considerations would render it unsustainable for the United States to wage a protracted war against a well-organized state. Media-wise, he contends, the war in Iraq showed that neo-fascist control over the media proved ineffective due to what he described as "inter-imperialist rivalries that are generating a tri-polar globalized society"

In the political arena, the illegality of the aggression against Iraq made the warmongers in Washington and London pay a high price in spite of the discredited character of the Saddam Hussein régime, so high a political price, argues Heins Dietrich, that any future aggression could only be successful if its political and media scenarios are worse that those in Iraq.

But it is in the military field that the war in Iraq was most revealing, with lessons that Dietrich considers vital for Third World nations if they are ever faced with the need to defend themselves against a US attack.

In his essay on the war against Iraq and US military might and how the world should perceive it, German sociologist Hienz Dietrich points to the fact that Sadam Hussein's military strategy was once again entirely inadequate to face the US offensive. As in 1991, following his outrageous invasion of Kuwait, ironically points out Dietrich, the architect of the Mother of All Military Failures again led his armed forces to destruction, with resistance only being offered by isolated units and paramilitary forces in some positions in southern Iraq. Snipers and mines did not play any significant role in the defense, he notes, adding that Saddam Hussein rejected Fidel Castro's advice that he had won his revolutionary war with mines and rifles. Saddam never asked the great strategist how he had won the war against the South African army in Angola, despite his being so close to the United States and so distant from the battle field, and in spite of the fact that the Soviet military had allowed the situation to become one of strategic defeat at Cuito Cuanavale.

With the American military strategy in Iraq clearly defined around strong tank columns escorted by mechanized infantry and protected on the ground by artillery and in the air by helicopters and bombers, advancing at night and taking advantage of their technological superiority, Hienz Dietrich argues that the only successful defense strategy for a country with a less advanced military technology has to necessarily include four basic ingredients: internal unity, a leadership ready to stand up to the challenge, substantial international support, and five types of weapons. These, according to the German scholar, should be
short range antiaircraft weapons carried by small mobile groups, anti-tank and anti-personal mines, night vision gear, and snipers, all integrated into a military doctrine like that used by the Vietnamese or Cuba's so-called "War of All the People," with special forces, irregular units, and the "topography" of the cities playing a central part and resulting in a protracted war of attrition.

Dietrich also recalls that Fidel Castro has said that "the enemy is strong in his positions, but weak in his movements," and that 8 well-trained combatants are a small army that can cause great harm to the enemy. This is the type of war that the US army can certainly not win, he notes.

German sociologist Hienz Dietrich concludes that the military lesson to draw from Iraq is therefore not that a US military aggression is irresistible, but rather that a united people with a committed leadership, capable of generating international support and having the right weapons can represent a military challenge of such
magnitude that no US government can deprive them of their freedom, as long as formal democracy continues to exist in the United States. Only the establishment of an openly Fascist dictatorship in United States and the extermination of the whole population of the attacked country could result in victory for the US military machine. And that, says Dietrich is something that is beyond the reach of the George Bush administration.



Back to top

We want to know what you think of this article.