A week before the “Coalition of the Willing” crossed the Line of Departure (LD) on 20 March 2003, this is what I wrote to friend who asked me about my feelings on the confrontation with Iraq (with some light copy editing).
Sorry its taken me a couple of days to get back to you. I’m still in Jordan and, as you may imagine, things are a little busy around here.
Your fluctuating views and possible ambivalence towards the current confrontation with Iraq is, if not natural, then at least considered. There are many pros and many cons to invading Iraq, many are equally valid. The discriminator tends to lay with the observer. I’ve noticed that the factors that separate those who are pro invasion from those who are against tend to boil down to two things, the individuals ideology, and even more important, their personality. In other words, 1) how does the person view the role of international law in resolving international disputes, and 2) is the person a gambler?
This is shaping up to be an ideological war. Nobody denies that Saddam is an SOB (except maybe Saddam). No one will shed a tear once his head is on a stick. The great divide between the US and Europe is not over Saddam. It is over the doctrine of Preemptive War.
The US is engaging Saddam because, according to the Administration, he represents a clear and present danger. In their more candid moments Administration Officials will admit that he is not all that dangerous to the US right now. But he could become dangerous if he is left alone. He hates us, he’s supported terrorists in the past (even if they weren’t Al Qaida). He’s got to go before he has a chance to kill American civilians. To do this we have to attack now before he has the means to strike America, which he is desperately trying to achieve.
Europe’s reply is to say “wait just one damn minute.” We (the Westernized World) have spent the last sixty years building institutions and a body of International Law that say you can’t attack another sovereign nation without a Casus Belli. In the case of Iraq, no matter what the US might profess, there is no smoking gun. Saddam has not attacked American civilians and he has not been tied to Al Qaida. Furthermore, you (the US) have failed to prove on the world stage (or even to your own people), beyond a reasonable doubt, that Saddam is actively hindering the inspections process and continuing to develop WMD. If this went to court tomorrow, Saddam would probably be acquitted.
So, what is more important and what will bring greater security in the long run? A preemptive attack on a rogue state to destroy forever the possibility of their development of WMD? Or the building of an international framework based upon the rule of law to hinder, identify and punish wrongdoers?
International Law or Law of the Jungle. That is, in a nutshell, the ideological divide.
This brings us to the second discriminator. Personality. Does the World feel Lucky? Whatever your ideological leaning, there is one thing that almost everyone agrees on. An attack on Iraq is going to seriously disrupt the status quo and nobody, but nobody, knows where all the pieces are going to fall. The Administration believes that the overthrow of the Baathist regime will, with the right support, lead to democratic reform and encourage the spread of liberalism throughout the Middle East, an area that is conspicuously lacking in progressive ideology. The rest of the world is just not so sure this is the case. Middle Eastern leadership is outspoken in their belief that an Invasion will sew unmitigated chaos throughout the region (this might be an indicator that just the opposite is true). Europe is just skeptical and not at all happy with taking the chance that the Sheikhs and Presidents for Life might be right. They also see themselves as having more to lose in the event of chaos than America. They have a much larger percentage of Islamic citizens than the US and they are far more reliant on Middle Eastern Oil. America is tossing the dice with the expectation that when they come to rest, they will read lucky number seven. Europe is predicting snake-eyes, or even worse, box cars.
So, Rule of Law and Law of Averages. Where do you fall? Have a nice war.
Leave a Reply