|
Volume CXXXIII, Number 1 |
 |
Problem: Where are the weapons of mass destruction?
PAT ROCKEFELLER
COLUMNIST
With more than a touch of in-your-face-sentiment I've been harangued lately by friend and foe alike over the fact that the only WMD's found in Iraq so far were human shredding machines, rape rooms, and enough car battery powered nut-shockers to satisfy even the most phallic obsessed of tyrants. Of course, they don't phrase it that way.
So, should I eat crow, or no?
Let it be said that this is an unambiguous embarrassment for the Bush Administration as their primary reason for war has yet to pan out. While few amongst us will shed a tear for the infringement upon Saddam's right to an enslaved populace, and we can all be happy that the death of his two sons will prevent a hereditary Hussein thugocracy, the advancement of human rights was never more than a positive externality in the war making decision. A very positive externality, sure, one not to be forgotten, and arguably worth the war itself, especially considering the low casualties amongst coalition soldiers and Iraqi civilians, but the U.S. went to war for national interests, not human rights.
So, did Bush lie? One of the most disturbing trends of the
last couple decades is how little we know about the actions of other countries
and non-state actors. From the surprisingly quick collapse of the Soviet
Union, to the testing of nuclear weapons by Pakistan and India, to September
11th, U.S. intelligence has been struggling to keep up. Bush didn't lie
- he didn't know.
And for that matter, neither did anyone else. Keep in mind that even our anti-war 'allies' (Germany, Russia, France) didn't make their case based on a lack of evidence. None of these nations questioned that Iraq had WMD and/or was attempting to build them. Their cases, right or wrong, were based, at least rhetorically on the primacy of sanctions and the necessity of U.N. backing. None of them stood up at the U.N. and said 'Hey, uh, fellas…call us crazy, but we think maybe Hussein destroyed all his weapons but didn't tell any one about it.'
The real question, the one I hope is being asked by the White House of the intelligence agencies is 'What the hell is going on here?' Is it possible that Saddam destroyed his caches of chemical and bio weapons? His labs? His blueprints? His documentation? How about the documents that documented the destruction of the weapons? Maybe it is.
Hussein wanted an end to U.N. imposed sanctions. The only way he could get that was to prove he had no weapons. However, to prove he had no weapons, he would have to essentially surrender his sovereignty for a period of time, during which he would be vulnerable to pressure, coups, and assassinations from domestic and foreign sources as Iraq opened itself up to the world. Additionally, he viewed his chemical and biological abilities as deterrents against other regional threats, such as Iran, which is significantly larger than Iraq. Having these weapons, or making others think he had these weapons offered him security and regional dominance.
The gamble Hussein made was that the U.S. would not go through with its threat of invasion. After the half hearted Gulf War of Bush Sr., and the low risk, low intensity cruise missile bombings of Clinton, regional withdrawal of U.S. troops from Lebanon in '84, Somalia in '92, the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in '98, the USS Cole in '00, Hussein's gamble may not have been all that bad. Had the U.S. been content to strike at suspected unconventional weapon sites then withdraw, the pressure to maintain sanctions may well have abated with Saddam in power and the status of his WMD program perfectly ambiguous.
Of course a team of Army engineers could still find a storage bunker buried deep under the sand loaded to the brim with the weapons we knew Saddam once had. The real threat to Bush is that until this happens, the public will lose faith in what we are being told, not because we necessarily think the president is lying, but because we don't necessarily trust the information he is given. It is also likely that the Bush Administration as a whole will lose faith in those providing it with the information it needs.
So, I'll skip the crow for now, and instead raise my glass
to a better future for Iraq, WMD or not.
|
FastCounter by bCentral |