Lacy Wright – Letter From WashingtonTHE CONTROVERSY surrounding US policy on Iraq has reached the point where some nasty exchanges have occurred between the United States and two of its most important allies. Germany and France, even more so, have taken their opposition to such lengths that NATO itself is feeling the effects. And public opinion in Europe (and among a minority, in the US itself) is growing downright virulent.
America, on its side, is calling the French and Germans some bad names, and some are saying that their behaviour vis--vis their former benefactor (ourselves) amounts to disloyalty. It is also being noted that, among the 15 nations that now comprise the European Union, not to mention the ten additional countries that will join next year, they and those of like mind are in the minority.
This kind of acrimony is hardly helpful to the objective to which we all agree we are committed - disarming the Iraq of Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi dictator, in fact, must be chortling. This is exactly the kind of fracas he must have hoped would erupt among those arrayed against him, and he is doing all he can, such as dribbling out minor concessions at the last minute, to stoke the fires.
At this point, there seem to me two directions in which things might move. First, the American and British military build-up in the Persian Gulf region may have gone so far, in both logistical and political terms, that only some truly dramatic breakthrough - like Hussein's death or exile - will be able to turn those troops around. That is coupled with what appears to be the US Administration's genuine conviction that Saddam Hussein poses a frightening danger to ourselves and others, and that there will never be another chance like this to be rid of him. These are strong reasons for moving ahead no matter what.
But there is another possible scenario. It can hardly be doubted that the strident reaction against a war, both by some governments and by large numbers of people around the world, has given everyone pause. That includes Prime Minister Blair in the UK and our own government. There is at least some time left (Washington sources are now saying two weeks, and who knows if that might slip). If during this window some really substantial progress could be made by the inspectors in Iraq, with some kind of assurance that it proceeded from a real change in Iraqi behaviour, such changes might stay the US hand.
This becomes more possible if the French, Germans and others move their critical eye away from Washington and fix it on Saddam Hussein. Some of this has started in recent days, with the Germans now having signed on to a European Council statement that implicitly includes war as a last resort (the German position before was "no war, ever") and that is harsher toward Iraq than previous ones. The French, Germans, Russians, and Chinese could ratchet up the pressure further by signing on to the new UN Security Council resolution that the US and UK say they will introduce soon, and that should give Iraq some very specific deadlines. If Hussein knows that he is really being given an ultimatum by the entire world, he might realise at last that he has no choice but to come clean.
This cannot happen, however, if the Americans relax their military pressure. It must be clear to Iraq that US forces are ready and willing to attack.
Meanwhile, I was struck by the comments of retired general Wesley Clark to CNN this week. A former NATO Supreme Commander, he led the bombing campaign during the Kosovo crisis. Clark estimated a US war against Iraq would last two weeks. Asked whether the final search for Saddam Hussein, however, might not be a bloody endeavour costing many lives, Clark said there would be no need to find him. Unlike Osama Bin Laden, said the general, Hussein has no following and would have no further influence in the world; thus, what happened to him would be
unimportant.
Lacy Wright was Deputy Chief of Mission at the US Embassy in Kingston and acted as Ambassador in 1993-1994. He can be reached at LacyWright@cox.net.
