How to Spare Many Lives on Both Sides of the Line : Americans should hope for a quick resolution of war with Iraq’s Hussein

If there has to be war in the Persian Gulf--and it’s obvious now that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was determined to not have it otherwise--then the American-led coalition must wage it with the greatest determination and energy. That is the surest way to bring the conflict to a quick end, hold down casualties and lessen suffering here at home.

As always, of course, the only predictable constant in war remains its unpredictability. That point was driven home in the war’s second day. The first 24 hours of battle had seen Israel spared from Iraq’s long-threatened attack. Then a missile attack came, inviting an Israeli response that would shake the anti-Iraq coalition. That is Saddam’s political goal; whether it can be realized will soon be known. But meanwhile, the massive allied air war against him continues, aimed at achieving United Nations objectives and meeting the region’s security needs.

The nagging uncertainties about how extraordinarily complex U.S. planes and weapons would perform under the confusing and arduous conditions of battle appear to have been lifted. From the early evidence, they are performing very well. The Navy’s Tomahawk cruise missiles are said to have hit their targets with remarkable accuracy. The high-tech electronics and “smart” munitions carried by a variety of aircraft from all the services are doing their jobs. But much more than precise technology is involved in the attacks that are crushing Iraq’s war-making ability. The Americans who fly into combat are not only courageous and well-equipped, they are also superbly trained. Let the results of that training be recorded and remembered. Training is not glamorous and it doesn’t produce many jobs. That’s why it is one of the first things Congress traditionally axes when defense budgets are cut. But training is again proving to be indispensable to winning battles. No less important, it is vital to survival.

THE ACCEPTABLE GOAL: President Bush has reminded the world of two main aims of this war. One is to liberate Kuwait and deny Iraq’s dictator any material, territorial or political rewards for his aggression. Another is to destroy his ability to make chemical and nuclear weapons, removing for now the threat that those instruments of terror pose to the region. These are unmistakably worthy goals. It would of course have been preferable to see them achieved through diplomatic negotiations and on the basis of rational political decisions. But time and time again Saddam Hussein demonstrated that he was not interested in pursuing these options. The consequences of his implacable stubbornness and blind ambition are unfolding now. The war he invited is not one that the international coalition need apologize for.

There is a natural international interest in getting this war over with fast, if for no other reason than to deny Hussein the chance to appear a hero in Arab eyes for having held out against the might of the American superpower. The United States and its allies can fully appreciate the risks: Winning a military victory while losing the political contest is a bleakly familiar story in history, and no one wants to see it repeated. But a clear awareness that time is important, that for sound political reasons Iraq’s defeat must come in a relatively short time, should not prompt unwise or costly military decisions.

THE KUWAIT QUESTION: Right now, so far as is known, the bulk of Iraq’s forces in Kuwait remain in place, well dug in and well armed. At some point there may be no alternative to rooting them out with a ground attack. Such operations threaten high casualties among American and other attacking forces. Perhaps those operations ought to be deferred for as long as possible. Better instead to depend on the demonstrated effectiveness of air power to reduce the ranks of Kuwait’s occupiers, break their morale, sever their supply lines. Better, in short, to invest more time in the air assault, if that is what’s needed to keep American and allied casualties down.

The gulf conflict, like others in U.S. history--including, notably, both the First and Second World Wars--has not been one Americans have rushed eagerly to embrace. Now that we are in it there has been an expected and appropriate rallying to back its objectives and support the men and women who are fighting for them.

The reluctance of many to get involved has been put aside, though the resistance of some remains. The anguish of those who have so passionately argued against American participation is understandable. But anguished concern is felt no less by those who endorse the aims of this conflict. That is why every American, whatever side of the argument he or she is on, hopes now for a quick resolution of this war that will spare the lives of warriors and civilians on both sides. That, too, is a worthy and necessary goal.