Iraq's bluff must be called

Noblesse Oblige
    By Jay Munir

It's difficult to advocate the use of force to solve international crises. We live in an age in which diplomatic solutions are used to address problems once solved through the deployment of troops--bombing campaigns seem passé to those savvy to the changing times. Academics dream up global "security communities" where international institutions make militaries obsolete and the peoples of the world live in peaceful dialogue. Saddam Hussein's Iraq, however, throws a monkey wrench into this picture. The Hussein regime's failure to implement the provisions of the Gulf War cease-fire, and its continued intransigence in the face of the United Nations' decrees, pose a direct threat to a world governed by peaceful negotiation and international standards of conduct. For the international community to institute a kinder, gentler "new world order," dictators like Hussein must be forced to play by the rules.

In the coming days, we will hear many reasons justifying a bombing campaign against Iraqi strategic sites as the Clinton administration attempts to build public support for military intervention. First, Hussein's failure to comply with U.N. directives destabilizes the oil-rich Persian Gulf, thus threatening the economies of much of the world. Moreover, Iraq's past missile attacks on our allies in Israel and Saudi Arabia make the specter of the Iraqi chemical and nuclear weapons program particularly haunting. Finally, Hussein's documented use of chemical weapons against domestic opponents makes the regime a threat to its own people, particularly the Kurds in the north and the Shiite Muslims of the south.

These arguments are certainly sufficient to justify U.S.-led military intervention in Iraq. But the threat Hussein poses to the credibility of a new global order of peaceful dialogue and international law, centered around institutions such as the U.N., is perhaps the most compelling argument for military action. Of course, using missiles to strengthen peace seems paradoxical, but an order without the means to reprimand dictators who defy international law as Hussein has is doomed to fail. Critics of U.S. foreign policy must realize that with dictatorial regimes at odds with liberal democratic traditions, the language of peaceful negotiation needs to be backed up by the threat of force. Unfortunately, sometimes the only way to get a dictator's attention is to bomb him.

In the Persian Gulf states neighboring Iraq, an entire generation is growing up faced with the constant threat of Iraqi military aggression. Apologists for the Iraqi regime too seem to have forgotten the damage which Hussein inflicted on the Israelis, Saudi Arabians, and Kuwaitis during the Gulf War. As long as Iraq continues to hide the full extent of its chemical and biological warfare capabilities, the threat to Iraq's neighbors continues. This situation is unacceptable if the Middle East is to be a stable and peaceful part of the world community.

Opponents of military action cite the danger posed to Iraqi civilians by any American bombing campaign. Yet military intervention may give Iraq's long-suffering civilians, especially Hussein's opponents, a reason for hope. Economic sanctions and diplomatic pressure on Iraq have not persuaded Hussein to cooperate with U.N. officials. Instead, the sanctions have hit the Iraqi population hard. If military action can force Hussein to comply with international directives, the need for continued sanctions may evaporate. Furthermore, any weakening of Hussein's military capabilities may give his domestic opponents the window of opportunity they need to destabilize the regime. The Iraqi people have suffered the consequences of Hussein's foreign military adventures, and if his regime shows signs of weakening, they may be willing to move against him.

Saddam Hussein is a dangerous dictator. In the last two decades, he has invaded two of his neighbors, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths and enormous suffering. The fear he instills in neighboring populations and domestic adversaries alike is not likely to subside unless the world takes decisive action.

As long as he makes a mockery of the U.N. and international standards of conduct, Hussein poses a threat to the peaceful and stable institutionalist order that the global community is working to construct. It is true that there are very few things worth fighting for--this is definitely one of them.

Recent Herald Columns by this Columnist:
NOTE: SITE WILL APPEAR IN A NEW BROWSER WINDOW

• New rich should not just consume, 1/16/98

Sites related to this article

• Iraq and a hard place
• U.S. ignores Iraqi suffering

Back to Opinion...

NOTE: SITE WILL APPEAR IN A NEW BROWSER WINDOW

• Shop countries, not just classes
• Yalies find obstacles on the road to study abroad