Examines issues of the day against a triumvirate of core principles: liberty, responsibility and justice.
comments: americanbeacon@hotmail.com
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
This is where you stick random tidbits of information about yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Thursday, March 06, 2003
We are now in the endgame of the Iraqi diplomatic dance and, unfortunately, it is more of a mosh pit than a waltz. There may be several forces clashing in a seemingly irreconcilable manner, but there is a way to resolve this issue to America�s benefit.
Within the United States, there are those Democrats who believe that American national security should be dictated by the likes of Angola, Cameroon, France and Syria. These Democrats will not say so in such words, or perhaps even admit to themselves that this is what they believe, but the fact is that any caveat requiring a U.N. stamp of approval is tantamount to subordinating American foreign policy to the Security Council. Anytime a Senator Clinton, Daschle or Nelson speaks in favor of military force out of one side of their mouths and then of requiring U.N. support through the other side, they are saying that America can only act in defense of its national security if whoever happens to be on the Security Council at the time agrees. In any event, the Congress has already voted to support President Bush and their waffling will yield them nothing since all political capital created by military victory will accrue to the Commander-in-Chief.
Then there are our European �allies,� namely France and Germany. Their assertions that Saddam is not an imminent threat cause justifiable head-scratching in America, for we did not need Hitler to storm the beaches of New England or the mid-Atlantic to recognize the threat he posed to our nation. It is not hubris or unilateralism when we say that if the Europeans do not agree with our policy, they should feel free to revert to their more familiar posture of uselessness, but should refrain from impeding our efforts to disarm Iraq. By virtue of our �pre-emptive� action to fight Hitler we have earned the right for a little latitude here. Nevertheless, however much the United States is able to win a war single-handedly, it would not hurt to have broader support, even if that comes through the feckless and duplicitous U.N. At this point, it may not cost President Bush much to gain that support as a result of Ankara�s failure to aid the very nation that pushed hardest for NATO to protect Turkey.
Because the Pentagon will now need to redeploy troops and materiel, experts claim it will take another 1-2 weeks to have our forces in place to launch our attack on Iraq. Certainly, we can do so now if necessary, but we will be in a better position after adjustments have been made in the wake of the Turkish parliament�s vote.
Meantime, Canada has quietly been advancing a compromise plan that would set a hard deadline for Iraq at the end of March. The difference between that timeframe, and the new Pentagon timeframe is a matter of only several days and should be negotiable. If the United States were to be able to exploit the Canadian plan during the time we had to rearrange our forces anyway, we have not lost anything. And, in the process, we would have diminished the animosity that, rightly or wrongly, is aimed at us. More importantly, we would be in a better position to have the rest of the world help shoulder the costs of destroying the Baath regime and reconstituting a free Iraq. The war�s beginning might be delayed a week or two (which, incidentally, would put the first shot back into the darkness of a moonless night and would not put the fighting into a materially hotter climate), but America would rightfully be able to claim having compromised and worked within the system to �let inspections work.�
The downside is, of course, that to follow this plan would continue the process of subordinating American defense concerns to a craven and glacial supranational organization. However true this might be nominally, there would be no illusions as to the power of the United States, when led by a resolute and determined President, to flex its muscles and sway the international community to its point of view. And the discovery of Saddam�s prohibited weapons programs will bolster American credibility while crushing the influence of those nations that did Saddam�s bidding at the U.N. This shift in the balance of power on the Security Council will have happened too late to help us in Iraq, but it will be very useful as we move on the remaining members of the Axis of Evil.
And, as current Security Council member Syria should be well aware, once Saddam has been dispatched, there will be a vacancy in that infamous, but ill fated, club.
3/06/2003 12:01:00 AM
|
|
| |
|
|
|
