Peace through strength
02.28.2003The New York Times reports that Iraq agreed to dismantle its Al Samoud 2 missile system. This is a first major step for Iraq. Let there be no mistake, however, this was due primarily to America's hawkish stance. Perhaps war can be averted - by showing unrelenting resolve to resort to force if necessary.
In the three months since UN weapons inspectors returned to Iraq, this is the first significant step. Hans Blix has consistently stated that there are numerous issues on which Iraq has not fully complied (30 of them). For twelve years, Hussein played a coy little game w/ the UN. Now he's dismantling a weapon system that he - only three days ago - denied existed. Progress.
But it was due to two factors: First, US and coalition troops (and make no mistake, a multinational coalition exists) massed on the Iraqi border w/ clear indications that they will strike if they have to. Second, Blix set a real, tangible, deadline (tomorrow) for Iraq to dismantle its Al Samoud 2 missile program. It was the combination of a real threat and strict deadline that forced Hussein to abandon a weapon primarily designed to strike at Israeli cities (perhaps carrying chemical, biological, or even nuclear warheads).
So why do France and other Security Council members resist imposing clear deadlines? They're afraid doing so will trigger war. But that's only true if Iraq won't disarm vountarily. Otherwise, deadlines make sense. Today, it worked. And it was willingness to resort to force - and a credible demonstration to that effect (I'd certainly call 200,000 troops a credible demonstration) that did it.
Posted by Miguel at 05:29 PM
Comments
Hasn't there been a recent proposal by Germany, France and Russia to give Iraq a specific and strict timetable for disarmament?
Posted by: melli at March 12, 2003 03:49 PM
Too little, too late, doesn't address the serious issues of nuclear and biological programs.
We do not have the time or the resources to have this fight over every minor item, and maintain 200,000 troops on station for years. Hussein is the problem. If we wanted to disarm, he could easily have done so just as South Africa and some of the "-stans" did.
Saddam does not wish to disarm, he's made that 100% clear. Fine. When he's dead, and his sons are dead, and his regime is history, and the Iraqi people are no longer being tortured, and the US Army steps into the role of weapons inspector in a defeated Iraq, this job will be done right and we can stop worrying and wondering.
Posted by: Joe at March 12, 2003 03:51 PM
The last version of the French-German proposal I saw had no timetable. I'm more encouraged by this turn. I'm not entirely sure that another four months is warranted ... but waiting four months might be more, um, diplomatic, n'est pas? As long as the deadline is firm and our "allies" don't go back on it later and give yet another extension ... but it's not my call.
And again, after the Al Samoud missile system, there are at least 29 other issues left unresolved by the Iraqis. Iraq has certainly not lived up to its obligations like other countries did.
Posted by: Miguel at March 12, 2003 03:51 PM