In
an historic speech to the United Nations General Assembly,
President George W. Bush made a powerful call to the international
community to join the United States in addressing the threat posed
by Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi regime, and Iraq's growing arsenal of
weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and ballistic missiles. Warning
that Iraq poses "a grave and gathering danger," he called on the
U.N. to "choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We
cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand
up for our security and for the permanent rights and hopes of
mankind."
The
President's direct challenge to members of the United Nations
marked the official beginning of his effort to build an
international coalition that will confront the totalitarian regime
in Iraq, which has defied 16 Security Council resolutions in the
past decade. Though world leaders appear deeply divided over the
issue, there are clear signs that the tide is turning against
Baghdad and support is growing for the Bush Administration's call
for a regime change.
The
strongest support for the Administration's position has come from
Great Britain, which is almost certain to join the United States in
seeking an end to the dictatorship in Iraq.
A
military campaign against the Iraqi government is likely to be a
combined U.S.-U.K. operation, with the strong possibility that
Australian forces will also take part. It is conceivable that new
members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), such as
Poland and the Czech Republic, could also make a military
contribution. NATO allies such as Turkey, Italy, and Spain, and a
number of Arab nations such as Kuwait and possibly Saudi Arabia,
Jordan, and Qatar, should step up to provide logistical and
strategic support. Diplomatic backing could come from a growing
number of allies once it becomes clear that Saddam Hussein has no
intention of complying with U.N. demands and that a military strike
is inevitable.
As
the debate continues in capitals across the world, it is more
widely expected that the United States will not have to go it alone
in Iraq. However, Washington will need to continue its efforts to
cement support within the U.N. Security Council, Europe, and the
Arab world. Specifically, the Bush Administration must:
- Continue to
press for a new U.N. Security Council resolution to deal with the
threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Saddam
Hussein's latest offer to grant access to U.N. weapons inspectors
should be seen by the international community as a continuation of
the destabilizing status quo and rejected as a cynical and
desperate ploy to cling to power.
- Continue working
with Great Britain to build the international coalition that will
deal with the Iraqi problem. Allied military, diplomatic,
and strategic support will be vitally important not only for a
campaign to destroy Iraq's WMD and eliminate its WMD programs, but
also after the war to ensure that long-term war aims are
implemented. These aims include supporting the Iraqi people's
efforts to rebuild their country and establish a successful ruling
federation representing the major sub-national groups; protecting
Iraq's energy infrastructure and resources and assuring Iraq access
to world markets; and preventing a possible attempt by Iran to
assert its influence aggressively in the region once Saddam is
gone.
- Condemn the
policies of appeasement of Iraq pursued by the European Union and
the Arab League. Leading opponents of taking action
against Iraq, such as Germany, should be strongly reproached for
moral cowardice and their failure to take a stand against a
totalitarian regime that threatens regional and world
security.
- Establish joint
U.S.-U.K. command of a post-war security force in Iraq.
U.S. and British chiefs of staff should retain central control over
all coalition forces, including forces from countries such as
France and Russia if they wish to participate. The Administration
should oppose the division of Iraq into administrative regions run
by different allies on the model of Kosovo or post-war
Germany.
Conclusion
The
opponents of war in Iraq have predicted that America, the world's
only superpower, would have to wage war on its own, with perhaps at
best the support of the United Kingdom. However, mounting evidence
suggests that the people of Iraq may be liberated by one of the
biggest strategic and diplomatic coalitions in modern times. A
significant and growing number of international allies support a
regime change. President Bush's speech to the United Nations was a
powerful wake-up call for action by an international community
that, for a decade, has been in a state of denial and suspended
animation in dealing with the Iraqi threat.
While the bulk of military operations will
probably be carried out by U.S. and British forces, strategic and
diplomatic support may be provided by a substantial number of
allies, including key European nations such as Italy and Spain and
some of Iraq's Arab neighbors. There is little likelihood that Arab
troops will participate in the military action to liberate Iraq,
but invaluable strategic support will be provided by Kuwait and
possibly by Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Qatar. It appears more likely
that the U.N. Security Council will not stand in the way of
military action. Russia and France have indicated that they may
support a U.S.-led strike, while China is likely to abstain. Many
more countries will want to participate in a post-war presence in
Iraq to help its people rebuild their nation into a successful and
free federation.
Clearly, the tide is turning against
Baghdad, and the United States may not have to go it alone to rid
the world of the threat to security and peace posed by Saddam
Hussein.
--Nile
Gardiner, Ph.D., is a Visiting Fellow in Anglo-American
Security Policy in the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute
for International Studies at The Heritage Foundation.