help in Iraq, he made a very poignant statement, "Come down and get soiled with us in Iraq". If not, troubles may brew in terms of trade and other issues. To be in the good book of the Big Brother is a big issue for the lesser brothers. Pakistan is mulling over and even the sub-continental giant, India has not ruled out the possibility outright. Arguments, both pros and cons, are in flux. But eventually it is the national interest that ought to be served.

Contrary arguments are largely philosophical. Iraq war is deemed as a unilateral and unnecessary perdition on an already de-fanged dictator, who happens to be at odds with the US Government. Lingering post-war uncertainty in finding a proof for WMD further undermines the US position. Sending troops to Iraq to shore up a mired US military shall only legitimise an illegitimate occupation. Thrust of this argument is immense and finds easy reverberation even in my mind. There are practical reasons too. Firstly, both internal and external public sentiment is not in sync yet. There is a possibility that the other countries (especially Muslim countries) might view such move in a negative light. Secondly, the Iraqi people can view the Bangladeshi troops as extension of an occupation army and this may spoil our future relationship with a (hopefully) democratic nation of Iraq. Lastly, safety of our lesser-armed troops can be in real peril. The daily reports of emerging guerrilla warfare are not comfortable news to gut without certain queasiness. For a country like Bangladesh, it can be an internal as well as external disaster, if its troops get in situation similar to that of Nazaf where multiple civilians were killed by the US forces.

Arguments in favor are primarily practical. With loss of an important export-advantage to the United States, large sector of Bangladeshi economy is hanging on a languid state. Morality and philosophy sounds great in oration, but eventually it is the "economy stupid!" Bangladesh should plot its course independent of its neighbours. They are in a comparatively better position. They can wait and bargain. Bangladesh should decide fast and I hope positively.

Getting on the wagon, however, when it is moving, by any means, is not the smarter choice.

* * *

Bangladesh has excelled in UN peacekeeping duties around the world but involvement in both Iraq and Afghanistan is not a good idea. They were blatant acts of aggression in response to Bush's so-called War on Terror and have been based on insufficient evidence and 'alleged involvement' in 9/11.

The primary reason for Secretary of State Powell's visit was probably because the US realises that the continual death toll of US troops will have a negative impact on the forthcoming US elections and they are in desperate need for non-US troops to act as bullet fodder to support its aims and objectives to rape Iraq dry of its black gold.

Of course, in the real world, improving an economic quota of export to the US is in Bangladesh's interest just as the Bulgarian Security Council vote on the pre-Iraq war UN resolution in favour of the US agenda was swayed based on the US support for Bulgarian entry to NATO. Unfortunately, poor countries will always take a selfish stance to better their own position even if it is at the expense of international peace and stability so I will not be surprised if Bangladesh troops do end up in Afghanistan, Iraq and other countries that the US plans to leave behind in a trail of destruction with its tactics of 'shock and awe'.

Abdul M. Ismail Mossley Hill, Liverpool, UK