Washington finds itself in a dubious legal situation in Iraq, reason enough to keep resisting international involvement and scrutiny in that country, while paying lip service to the idea of reserving an 'important' role for the United Nations in some distant future.

Having painted itself into a legal corner as an international outlaw over Iraq, Washington now reported plans to treat the hot potato of former Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, as "a prisoner of war under the Geneva Convention", but to be tried by a special court (read: kangaroo court) since set up by the US-installed Interim Governing Council (IGC) under the supervision of the so-called Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA).

Can an Iraqi citizen be treated, in a contradiction in legal terms, as a 'prisoner of war' by the non-existent state of Iraq, which succeeded the people's republic demolished by mercenary invasion forces sent in by Washington and London? Is Saddam a 'prisoner of war' of Iraq, and if so, what war did he wage against Iraq?

The only way out of the current legal imbroglio in Iraq is for the people of that long-suffering country to unite, rise up, drive the mercenary invaders and the CPA/IGC out and set up a revolutionary government. The American people can be expected to quickly change their current mindset on Iraq and capitulate since any disproportionate increase in the bodybag count would be an unbearable price for the American man-in-the-street.

Already, there are shades of Afghanistan under Soviet occupation in Iraq. An army of unemployed, children, teenagers, students, freedom fighters and lone rangers - and the marriage of convenience forged by an unholy alliance of Islamic militants, the mafia, underworld elements, warlords, ex-Baath Party loyalists and ex-Iraqi Army soldiers - have all stepped into the power and security vacuum in Baghdad to pummel away mercilessly at the US, its allies and their local stooges.

It is becoming increasingly evident that Washington has only two policy objectives in Iraq: to 'own', control and manage the vast oil reserves of that country for itself while leaving a pittance for the Iraqi people, and the "transfer of sovereignty" to a puppet regime which will not only agree to the permanent stationing of troops.

This is in compensation to the loss of US bases in Saudi Arabia in the wake of Sept 11, 2001. So much for all the 'White Anglo-Saxon Protestant' hogwash about bringing democracy to Iraq and the Middle East. The mask of the halo is gone, revealing the horns, tail, cloven hoofs and tri-spear. Whither the moral premises of western civilisation?

The clock is certainly ticking away for Washington in Iraq; its days are clearly numbered. For one, its unlikely that the US Congress will approve another huge funding package for the continued occupation of Iraq given the uncertain benefits of such measures for the US economy in the face of the worsening budget deficit.

Also, none of the creditor nations will agree to forgive Iraq's US$120 billion foreign debt burden, given the politically unacceptable precedents this will set in international law and in relations with other nations.

The bitter lessons the international community can draw from Iraq is the grave dangers that have emerged, when the world naively allowed the UN to be manipulated and reduced to a rubber stamp by the US and Britain. Only total international unity coupled with political will can help rescue and rehabilitate the US from its current pathetic status as a rogue superpower on the loose.

Finally, the loud clapping, childish cheering and shameless display of sycophancy by the American and Western press corps, assembled at the press conference of US envoy to Iraq Paul Bremer to announce the capture of Saddam, spoke volumes of the objectivity and credibility of the Western media, and the sad depths to which it has degenerated especially since Sept 11.