The U.S. Isn’t the World’s Policeman

It may be tempting to lash out against Iraq for its continued defiance of the United Nations, but the resort to force will only play into Saddam Hussein’s hands. Iraq’s apparent development and concealment of biological weapons are indeed cause for concern, but there is no indication of any immediate threat that would justify the use of military force. Because of sanctions and previous U.N. weapons inspections, Iraq’s military power has been reduced and its ability to deliver biological or other forms of destruction is diminished. It can threaten its neighbors (and the United States) with terrorism, but this is a danger that bombing cannot erase and will only intensify.

There is no assurance that bombing Iraq will guarantee compliance with U.N. weapons inspections. Forty-three days of bombing during the Gulf War did not eliminate Iraq’s nuclear capabilities (that job was accomplished by U.N. inspectors), and there is little prospect that renewed bombing could achieve the intended result now. There is even less prospect that a few days of bombing will unseat Saddam Hussein or seriously undermine his base of power. Only a major ground invasion could accomplish that, and few are prepared to accept the costs that this would entail.

Renewed military strikes kill innocent people who have no say over the policies the U.S. is trying to change. The intensified hatreds this would arouse might lead to renewed terrorist threats against Americans overseas and perhaps even here at home. The use of force will deepen Iraqi resentment against the United States and might stiffen Iraq’s resistance to U.N. demands. When the dust settled and the dead were buried, the confrontation would probably continue.

The proposed use of military force against Iraq is likely to cause serious political and diplomatic problems. The bombing campaign that U.S. officials have threatened would inflame Islamic radicalism in the region and further damage the already faltering Middle East peace process. U.S. military action would divide the U.N. Security Council and erode what is left of the fraying coalition against Saddam Hussein. The prospects for united action against Iraq in the future would be diminished.

If the U.S. attacks Iraq it will be acting with minimal international support. Only Britain is likely to join us. This is in stark contrast to the Gulf War, when some two dozen nations joined together to resist Saddam Hussein’s aggression against Kuwait. Washington is unwilling to seek renewed Security Council authorization for its proposed action because it knows that such approval will not be forthcoming.

In effect, the United States is preparing to act as the world’s policeman, arrogating to itself the role of chief U.N. enforcer. This is a role that the world body does not want us to play and that we can ill afford. In the name of upholding the U.N.’s right to conduct weapons inspections, the United States would be preempting and undermining the authority of the United Nations. If this is a confrontation between Iraq and the U.N., the resolution of the crisis must come through the world community acting in concert.

The alternative to military force is to maintain sanctions and negotiate a diplomatic solution. Sanctions are an imperfect tool, but they have been partly effective in reducing Iraq’s military potential and helping U.N. inspectors eliminate many of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The humanitarian costs have been high, but these are being addressed now through the oil for food program. The humanitarian effort should be expanded so that the medical and nutritional needs of the Iraqi people are fully satisfied.

The key to a diplomatic settlement is strict adherence to the Gulf War cease-fire Resolution 687, which stipulates that the ban on Iraqi exports will be lifted when weapons inspections are completed. The U.S. position that sanctions will remain until Saddam Hussein is gone violates this resolution and offers no incentive for Iraq to settle. The Security Council should go back to the original formula and propose a bargain in which Iraq is offered a fixed timetable for the lifting of sanctions in exchange for specific steps toward full compliance with U.N. weapons inspections. If Iraq refuses, sanctions and the humanitarian program would remain in place. If it accepts, the long Iraqi ordeal will finally come to a successful conclusion.