Bookmark www.milnet.com     Contact milnet@milnet.com

_____________________________________________________________________________________
 

U.S. is urging U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan to convince Iraq to allow U.N. inspectors into Iraq again to confirm no nuclear, biological or chemical programs are active in Iraq.  Sec-Def Rumsfeld has also repeatedly come out with a request for stiffer inspections if and when they resume.  Will these diplomatic efforts help Iraq avoid a confrontation with the U.S.?
 

Last Minute Diplomacy? Or Attempts at Appeasement Destined for Failure

With the U.N. Secretary General's upcoming trip to Iraq in March, those favoring non-violent means to persuading Iraq to join the civilized nations of the world are confident diplomacy will work and that Annan's trip will eliminate any rationale for U.S. attacks on Iraq.

With media stories ranging from inside info that says the U.S. is planning attacks any minute to U.S. can't attack because there aren't enough JDAMs in inventory, we choose to explore the more rational reasons U.S. planning is moving at a calm and deliberate pace.

Much like President George Bush's leadership prior to the attacks on Afghanistan positions of Taliban and Al-Qaida, his team is carefully weighing a wide number of factors.  The recent announcement of Spec Ops aid to the former republic of Georgia is just one in many small steps toward strengthening the U.S. operational position in the region.  There is also a meaningful political agenda at work as well.

On a number of occasions, U.S. policy makers and military planners have faced situations where an ally in the middle east finds they cannot support U.S. military operations to be based or launched from their country.  With Georgia added to the list of possible launch points, some pressure could be taken off of Turkey if necessary.

And of course more allies with "skin in the game" means an overall stronger political position.  And training Georgian troops on how to deal with terrorists should benefit, Georgia, Russian and the region, not to mention an overall improvement in the pace and ability to control the War on Terrorism.  The ATC (Anti Terrorist Coalition), the loose coalition of countries who have signed on to help the U.S. "root out terrorism wherever it lies", will gain from another source of intelligence and possible participation in other ways such as financial actions against terrorist cells, capture of Al-Qaida or Taliban members who have fled Afghanistan just to mention a few.
 

Necessity for Change

The U.S. has been reminding world leaders of the Iraqi threat quite regularly.  Not trying to link Iraq to the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. has pointed out the "standalone threat" presented by Iraq.  This arises from Suddam Husseins refusal to live up to the commitments made at the end of the Gulf War.  These commitments include inspections for nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons as well as destruction of stocks of those weapons and no further development.  As has been cited many times before, ANY diversion from the regime cited at the closing of the Gulf War is an abrogration of the treaty ceasing hostile action against Iraq.  Therefore any member nation of the coalition could take it upon itself to resume hostile activities to protect itself  and Iraq's neighbors.  No permission is needed, no one must be consulted.

Political winds may change, blowing Kuwaiti's to forget who returned their country to them, but the harsh reality of another invasion by Iraq would quickly remind them.  Iraqi sales of weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups would also bring home the reminder to any country who DOES NOT practice Islamic Extremism.  This would include non-secular nations such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Oman and Yemen just to name a few.

What concerns western analysts (MILNET included) is the fact that since December of 1998, there have been no inspectors in Iraq, no one to root out NBC weapons programs.  Evidence has mounted to indicate not only have the programs been reinstated, but are progressing at a pace that has created new stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and may have produced a RWDW (Radioactive Waste Disperal Weapon).  There is also some evidence that Iraq may have acquired the means to produce and assemble a number of nuclear weapons.  If Iraq has been able to restart a nuclear fuel facility, then Iraq may have the necessary nuclear fuel to complete one or more nuclear weapons.  Certainly Iraq has the capability to deliver such weapons.
 

Diplomacy at Work

The United Nations representative from the U.S. will be asking the U.N. according to State Department spokesman Richard Boucher , and specifically Secretary General Kofi Annan to make a strong plea if not demand to Iraq to once again allow the weapons inspectors into that country.  Last week U.S. Secretary Colin Powell made a very simple and straightforward proposal.  In answer to a question as to what Iraq can do to lift sanctions and prevent future action from the U.S. and others waging war against Terrorism, Powell said,

"there is a simple  way to test the proposition; that is, to let the inspectors in."

"The president is determined to keep this on the front burner and is looking  at all the options that are available for him to deal with this in a  decisive way.  ...We still have a U.S. policy of regime change  because we believe Saddam Hussein should move on and that the Iraqi people  deserve better leadership."

 "...regime change is something the United States ... might  have to do alone."

"The Iraqis have had more time to go underground. They've had lots of dual use technologies that have come in. They've had lots of illicit things that have come in. They have advanced their weapons of mass destruction programs.

"...If you try to use the old regime, it wouldn't work. You would have to have a much more intrusive regime and many more inspectors and the Iraqis not controlling when they could come in, where they could go, what they could do."

Looking at these events we have a pattern of diplomatic effort which spells the end for Saddam Hussein and promises the Iraqi people a new regime.

President Bush, the Department of Defense, and  the Department of State team, have made an effort to give the appeasement crowd all the rope needed to hang themselves -- offering the maximum diplomatic effort backed up with a "no choice" scenario which will culminate in the near future in no excuses left for Iraq and no rationale for the U.S. to hold off any longer in an attack against Iraq.  This methodical, step-by-step approach is an engagement policy destined to either solve the problem with diplomatic pressure from the world, or violent solution from the U.S. and any ally wishing to help us end the threat.

No one will be able to accuse the U.S. of not taking enough diplomatic steps, not giving enough warning, or not setting out the means to prevent hostilities.  This well thought out, progressive pressure clearly sets the stage for the President to point to the steps taken -- We have tried everything short of bribery to get the Iraqi leader to make the right decision.  But Saddam Hussein has continually refused to take even one step to satisfy the world that he is not embarked upon programs that threaten not only his neighbors, but the entire region and the world.  We cannot allow this man and this country to pass on weapons of mass destruction to terrorists.

While we aren't as careless to predict an "any day" attack on Iraq, we do not see any steps taken by Iraq to prevent such conflict, and the increasing levels of pressure seem to us to ratchet up the rhetoric to a point where military action is the only dialog left.  And as the days before U.S. bombing began Operation Desert Storm, we see a countdown to conflict that at present, Saddam Hussein seems to be ignoring.  Last time, it led to an attack on Baghdad.  This time we believe it will lead to a more personal wake-up call.
 

© Copyright, 2002, Michael Crawford, MILNET

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 

distributed worldwide by AFI Research afi@supanet.com