Clear Case for Hitting Iraq

How many more times will the United Nations Security Council, with American concurrence, sternly admonish Iraq that it must live up to its often given and just as often broken promises to cooperate fully with U.N. inspectors as they try to find the weapons of mass destruction Saddam Hussein continues to hide? How many more times will the United States threaten military strikes because Iraq has flagrantly violated its commitments, only to find reasons to do nothing, except solemnly warn that next time it really, truly will do what it threatens?

Just days after President Clinton called back aircraft that were only minutes away from launching cruise missiles against Iraq, just days after Iraq gave assurances that it would cooperate fully with U.N. inspection teams, Baghdad reverted to form. To U.N. chief weapons inspector Richard Butler’s request for specific documents relating to chemical and biological warfare programs, Iraq responded with its familiar catalog of lies, evasions and accusations. It claimed that the documents had all been destroyed or never existed in the first place. It called Butler, an Australian, a U.S. lackey. It denounced his request as a provocation intended to set the stage for U.S. airstrikes.

On the latter point, Baghdad seems to have little to worry about for now. On Nov. 15 Clinton said Iraq must turn over to the U.N. all documents related to the production of its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them. On Nov. 20 Iraq refused. Clinton’s response has been not to “overreact,” as he put it, opting to await more “facts” before doing anything. Administration officials suggest this laid-back gambit aims at exposing Hussein for the liar and cheat that he is--as if these facts were not already fully in evidence!--so as to justify to the world any U.S. military action that might yet be taken.

But the case for taking military action does not have to be justified again. It derives from Iraq’s record of the last seven years. It is a certainty that Iraq continues to hide materials to make prohibited weapons and refuses to hand over information about its efforts. That is all the justification the president needs to order punitive airstrikes. Clinton is concerned about overreacting. It would be far better if he worried about underreacting, about equivocating, about issuing warnings that prove to be hollow, to the detriment of U.S. credibility.