President Bush's Monday night speech on Iraq was a forceful
and persuasive explanation of why the United States must resolutely
confront Iraq's "murderous tyrant." Like a skilled prosecutor
summing up the case against a criminal, Bush reviewed Saddam
Hussein's crimes, detailed why the United States must take action
to stop them, and explained why American action must come sooner
rather than later.
Bush noted that the fundamental problem in Iraq is the nature of
Saddam Hussein's brutal regime. Given its long record of using
terrorism against its own people as well as its neighbors, the
United States cannot afford to allow it to obtain the word's most
dangerous weapons -- particularly a nuclear weapon. Saddam's
growing "arsenal of terror" and his proclivity for terrorism,
including cooperation with Al Qaeda, means that "the threat from
Iraq stands alone."
Bush rejected the false argument that a war with Iraq would
distract the U.S. from the war against terrorism: "To the contrary,
confronting Iraq is crucial to the war on terror." Because Iraq is
one of the foremost state sponsors of terrorism, the President
correctly has reasoned that any war against terrorism that leaves
Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in power will be judged a
failure.
Moreover, Iraq's decade-long contacts with Osama bin Laden's Al
Qaeda terrorist group, including training terrorists in the use of
bombs and chemical weapons, make Saddam's outlaw regime and bin
Laden's terrorists "different faces of the same danger."
Iraq poses a much greater threat to U.S. national security than
does Osama bin Laden. Its clandestine programs to build nuclear,
chemical, and biological weapons of mass destruction have proceeded
without outside interference since the 1998 expulsion of United
Nations weapons inspectors. President Bush noted that if it can
obtain the necessary fissile material, Iraq could have a nuclear
weapon within a year.
And once Iraq has such a weapon, it could pass it on to its
terrorist allies. This is one reason Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld
repeatedly has said: "Time is not on our side."
To prevent Iraq from crossing the nuclear threshold and becoming
an even more dangerous terrorist state, President Bush clearly has
thrown down the gauntlet. Congress now must do its part and vote to
approve a resolution supporting the use of force to disarm Iraq if
Baghdad continues to violate its obligation to disarm itself, under
the ceasefire agreement that ended the 1991 Gulf War.
Such a congressional vote would strengthen U.S. diplomacy at the
United Nations Security Council, which is considering how to force
Iraq to live up to its past agreements on destroying its weapons of
mass destruction.
The Security Council, if it is to be effective, must adopt a
tough new resolution that authorizes the use of force if Iraq fails
to accept a stronger and more extensive inspections regime that can
negate Iraqi deception and duplicity. President Bush made a strong
case for allowing U.N. inspectors to interview Iraqis outside of
Iraq, to minimize Saddam's ability to intimidate Iraqis
knowledgeable about his prohibited weapons programs.
The previous U.N. inspection process failed to uproot Iraq's
prohibited weapons programs in seven years of inspections between
1991 and 1998. There is no reason to believe that similar
inspections now will be any different.
Bush's strong speech therefore has put additional pressure on
the United Nations Security Council to realistically address the
growing threat posed by Iraq. If the U.N. fails to devise an
acceptable means of disarming Iraq, then Bush has warned that the
United States will do so itself, with the help of a coalition of
the willing.
James Phillipsis a Research Fellow at The Heritage
Foundation.