With guns drawn, the authorities took computer files, broke a family photo of their target, and allegedly stole his Koran. Remarkably, it was just last January that Chalabi had sat behind Laura Bush while husband George gave his State of the Union speech. "I told them to get out," a furious Chalabi told the press. "We are slaves under (American) orders."

The latest surprise in the surreal saga of post-war Iraq can only be viewed as another blow to the credibility and competence of the Bush administration. I say 'campaign' because 'policy' is too inaccurate a term to describe what the Bush administration is doing to that country. According to press reports, the U.S. accused Chalabi of passing on sensitive intelligence information to Uncle Sam's mortal enemy, Iran.Remarkably, it was just a few weeks ago that the U.S. was still using

American tax payer money to pay Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress party (INC) $340,000 a month for whatever services, if any, they were rendering for our country.

But Patrick Lang, former director of the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), told the Newsday newspaper in New York City that colleagues in U.S. intelligence community, had told him that INC was, in fact, working for Iranian intelligence, and supplying them with information it got from its U.S. benefactors. 'They (the Iranians) knew exactly what we were up to," Lang said.

If that's true, Chalabi may go down as one of the biggest con men in modern political history, a man who could sell bags of sand to a den of thieves in the Sahara desert. For starters, Chalabi is the man many observers believe convinced the Bush administration that Saddam has those phantom weapons of mass destruction, and that the Iraqi people would view the U.S. as liberators.Even at this late date, prominent American officials are still praising Chalabi for his "services." For instance, last May 21, General Richard Myers, the most senior U.S. military leader, defended Chalabi and his INC, saying Chalabi's organisation has helped save American lives in Iraq. At the same time, prominent neo-conservative and Pentagon adviser Richard Perle, no doubt, also spoke for his pals, when he charged that "the CIA despises him (Chalabi); the State Department despises him. They did everything they could to put him out of business."

Perle never explained why the CIA and the State Department despise Chalabi, but it's true that Chalabi's relationship with his U.S. benefactors has steadily deteriorated during the American occupation. Chalabi's independence since he moved to Iraq after Saddam's ouster has really irked the Bush administration.

Although Chalabi is not an observant Muslim, he has moved closer to Iraq's conservative Shiite Muslim community. Reportedly Chalabi is trying to forge ties with the U.S.'s arch enemy Muqtada al-Sadr. He has been a vociferous opponent of the U.S. efforts to re-instate large numbers of Saddam's Baathist Party, saying it was like letting Nazis rule post war Germany.

These important developments beg the question: is this an effort by the U.S. to put the genie back into the bottle before it turns into a monster too big to control? At this point we don't know.

Meanwhile, the U.S. has tried to say that the raid of Chalabi's compound was an Iraqi Governing Council decision, but council members have categorically denied it. "The Governing Council unanimously condemns the raid on Mr. Chalabi's house and holds the coalition authorities responsible," Samiel al Askari, Deputy Council representative for Shiite leader Mohammed Bahral-Olum.

Ironically, Chalabi, a man with little popular following in Iraq, might actually benefit from falling out of favour with the Bush administration. To many Iraqis, he will look like a fearless nationalist who isn't going to knuckle under to the super power. Chalabi has been a high profile critic of way the U.S. led coalition is planning to turn over so called "sovereignty" to the Iraqis on June 30.

After the coalition leaves Iraq, it's a good bet that Iran will become the dominant influence in the country. Chalabi will surely gain, if he is in bed with the Iranians.

Chalabi has proven to be slick, cunning and a lot smarter than his former paymasters in the Bush administration. It would be foolish to count him out as a major figure in Iraq's future.

After the raid, Chalabi appeared on many U.S television news shows, insisting he was innocent and saying he was willing to come before the U.S; Congress to face his accusers. That's good idea. Even with the U.S. public on the verge of experiencing commission fatigue, it does deserve straight answers to some important questions.

Let's start with these: How central a role did Chalabi play in convincing the Bush administration that Saddam had WMD and Al Qaeda ties? Where did all the money we gave to the INC go? Why did the U.S government put all its eggs in one basket, and support a man convicted in Jordan in 1992 of embezzlement charges? If the espionage charge is true, how did Chalabi get access to sensitive information, and when did we know he was a spy? Who in the U.S government gave him the intelligence? How many American lives have been lost because of the leaked intelligence?

Whatever the answers, the Chalabi fiasco is another graphic example illustrating the Bush administration's tragic flaw. In these dangerous times, we have a government that has an ineffective, even destructive management style, and which prefers to isolate itself from differing opinions on issues. There were plenty of sources in the CIA and State Department who distrusted Chalabi and warned the Bush administration policy makers to be cautious in dealing with him. But given the ideological agenda of the neo-conservative clique running the White House, their admonitions were ignored or downplayed.

My advice to President George Bush, Jr. is to start reading the newspapers. That's a good way to start finding out what's happening in Iraq.

Ron Chepesiuk is a Visiting Professor at Chittagong University and a Research Associate at the National Defense College in Dhaka.