A citizen of the Middle East does not need to have an opinion about the war in Iraq. It is a force of nature, manufactured by forces beyond our control. We may as well have an opinions about sandstorms, hamsinim and locusts. A waitress in Los Angeles has more influence on many aspects of the future of the Middle East than a foreign ministry official in any Middle East capital: she can vote in the US elections. That is where it will be decided what sort of government Iraq shall have and whether or not Yasser Arafat and Ariel Sharon are partners for peace. Nonetheless, even the condemned can make observations on the preparations for their execution.

To a fly on the wall, incompetence, disinformation and chaos seem rampant. The war did not begin with a whiz-bang "Shock and Awe" attack followed by the quick collapse of the Iraqi Army. Instead of microwave magic, Vietnam-age B-52s drop plain ordinary bombs and missiles on Baghdad. The damage is dramatic, but of doubtful strategic value. Expectations of mass surrender are not materializing. Announcements that the Iraqi government is in chaos are proven false by wily Iraqi strategy and delaying tactics. It seems that the allies grossly underestimated their enemy. They did not prepare Americans and British, who apparently have forgotten what it takes to conquer a country. People became dismayed and worried as the first, really few, casualty and POW reports came through, sending stock markets plummeting. Such hubris and surprise have not been displayed since Western generals dismissed the idea that Japanese could fight a mechanized war.

It remains to be seen if the US proves the doctrine that it is possible to capture cities and win battles by air power alone. Air Marshall Goring tried, and he failed. The doctrine was tried again in Vietnam and in the Yom Kippur war, and it failed. However, just because nobody has succeeded in putting on a cape and flying safely out of a sixth story window, doesn't mean you won't be the first one to do it, so go ahead and try. Perhaps everything will be OK. If the doctrines are proved wrong, the US had better have the staying power to win, or the wisdom to know when it is impossible.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi army is giving the Americans and the British a run for their money in Basra and Karbala as they did in Nassiriyeh and Um Qasr, making them pay for their advance, buying time, waiting for summer perhaps, and trying to bog them down in the desert. It is not "war deluxe." Perhaps someone can find a use for all those knowledgeable "background analyses" and "insider reports" about electronic wizardry winning the war painlessly.

Where are the weapons of mass destruction that Saddam has been hoarding? None are in sight yet, and none have been used by the Iraqis. It is a plain ordinary war thus far, with plain ordinary bombs, tank shells and artillery used to kill plain ordinary people.

The military operations are of a piece with the amateurish and clumsy handling of Iraq from the start. It began with the announcement or leak, that the US is intent on regime change in Iraq. The die was cast. Once that was on the table, there was no turning back. The US had to fight and win this war, regardless of allies or objective conditions or any other considerations, because its prestige was now on the line, and there was no way to back down.

Now that the war has started, we must hope for the best, for the Iraqi people and for the USA. If Saddam remains in power in a month, it will be a devastating blow to the Iraqi opposition, to US prestige and to every ally of the United States in the Middle East. If you have committed yourself to riding a tiger, don't let go.

However, we must give thought to what will follow. There are three different aspects to consider: Iraq and Arab regimes; The USA and the world; Israel and the Palestinians.

If the pundits are right, Iraqis will live in peace and harmony, enjoying the benefits of democracy, and by some magic process, this will spread to all other Middle Eastern countries.

If the pundits are right, the war must be "good for the Jews." On this point, the PNA and the anti-Zionists agree with right-wing Zionists such as Washington consultants Richard Perle and Meyrav Wurmser. According to them, the purpose of the war is to make the Middle East safe for Ariel Sharon. Under cover of the war, the Palestinians tell us, millions of Palestinians will be spirited out of the West Bank and Gaza and transferred to Arab countries. Right-wing Zionists agree that transfer is good and possible. Nobody considers who will allow this transfer to take place, or why Palestinians will love Israel any the better after they have lost their homes. Be that as it may, we already know that the pundits and hatemongers were wrong. The Palestinians don't seem to be going anywhere, and are spiritedly cheering on Mr. Saddam Hussein. At the end of the war, the USA and Britain will need to quell some of the tremendous resentment that was aroused by it, and without a doubt they will insist on progress in implementing the quartet roadmap and Palestinian statehood, as Tony Blair has already remarked. What Israel could have given magnanimously in return for actual peace and concessions, it will now be forced to give in return for lip service paid to Palestinian democracy. A most unpleasant moment is arriving for Ariel Sharon and his right-wing government, similar to the moment of truth faced by Yitzhak Shamir in 1991. after Operation Desert Storm. Sharon understands that he will have to permit some sort of Palestinian state, and the settlers understand that he will do it. That is why they shot an effigy of him at the recent Purim festival in Qiriat Arba. The roadmap may yet put Sharon into the "peace" camp, whether he likes it or not. That may, however, be the only benefit of this war.

The great benefit of this war was supposed to be democracy for Iraq. We were told that democracies are good, because they do not support wars, and would encourage moderation. A great hope for a "new Middle East" that would really be good for its people. We are all still hoping, but the signs do not look good. In The New Republic, Kanan Makiya, Iraqi opposition leader writes in frustration:

In Afghanistan, the US government found itself up to its neck in factional politics, and doesn't want a repeat of the same. The US has been wary of fracturing Iraq or allowing domination by the Shia majority. The US alliance with Turkey assures that the Kurds cannot be given too much freedom as well.

An Israeli commentator, Shai Feldman of the Tel-Aviv University Jaffe Institute, explained that democracy will take a long time to implement, which would entail a long US occupation and consequently great Arab resentment, and that in any case, "only the military" could hold Iraq together. Instead, he proposes that the US support an Egyptian-style government. In other words, yet another Mukhabarat (secret police) state. Suddenly, the war is not about "Freedom for Iraq" at all. Of course, Professor Feldman forgot to mention that the aim of the last CIA engineered coup that installed the Baath party in Iraq, and with it, Saddam, was to create exactly such a Mukhabarat state with the "stability" so admired by certain people in the US State Department

Iraqi Shi'a leaders warned that US forces must leave as soon as Iraq is liberated, and allow the formation of a "national" government. The nature of this "national" government is undefined. Shi'a leaders get support from the Islamic Republic of Iran, which gives shelter and resources to Iraqi Shi'a opposition.

However, the most alarming consequences may manufactured outside the Middle East. One of the goals of the US stance was supposedly to restore the credibility of the UN. Now we learn that instead, the UN may be destroyed, and with it, the Americans may trash not only the multilateralism of the "New World Order," and not only  the European-American alliance that was born of the Marshall plan, but also the US-French friendship that dates back to the very birth of America. The irrepressible US Pentagon consultant, Richard Perle, has announced the end of the United Nations in Guardian and Spectator articles. Perle and others have also indicated that the US may break its traditional alliance with France and other European countries which oppose the war. With that, the Middle East would return to being an active arena for a more open version of "the Grand Game" of imperialism, played by France, Great Britain, Russia England, Germany and Turkey in the last century, and recast periodically with different actors. Soviet -American rivalry helped fuel violence and prevent progress in the Middle East until the end of the cold war. Hopes that a New World order might bring peace and prosperity would now be dashed, as great-power rivalry returns. Moreover, Iraq may not be the last war. Shimon Peres, as well as US officials and commentators, portray an Alice in Wonderland world, where the Red Queen says "Off with his head" and the offender is supposed to disappear. They tell us that there are many other rogue regimes such as Iran, Syria and North Korea, that require correction by the United States. Unilateral use of force will create new resentments and great power rivalries. The twenty-first century "New World Order" of Bush Sr. could disintegrate into nineteenth century colonial rivalries and brush wars. The sun may not set on the American Empire. Neoconservative commentator Max Boot has already dusted off Rudyard Kipling's "White Man's Burden." Once an object of derision in the United States, symbolizing the old order of British colonialism, the poem is now to be put in service of the new order.

The American military effort is called "Iraq Freedom" or "Freedom for Iraq," but it is not at all certain this operation will bring freedom for Iraq. The British operation in Iraq is called "Telic," implying that it has a defined purpose. But the war that is supposed to give democracy to the Iraqis, bring peace to the Middle East and ensure compliance with the will of the International community may instead give the Iraqis a police state, force the Palestinians and Israelis into more disastrous play-acting about peace,  and destroy the UN, igniting another era of colonialist big-power rivalry in the Middle East.