For the week of September 18 - 24, 2002

War averted? 
Don’t count on it

Commentary by PAT MURPHY

---

No doubt about it: George Bush’s tough-talk threat to unleash the U.S. military on Iraq with or without Congress, with or without the United Nations forced Saddam Hussein to claim he’ll allow unconditional UN weapons inspections.

But there’s no doubt about this either: the wily Saddam – who’s broken every promise he’s made to the UN – is trying to buy time. Cynics believe he’ll repeat tricks when weapons inspectors were in Iraq after the Gulf War by using 11^th hour conditions to foil inspectors and drive them out of the country. Saddam now also has the benefit of the time it’ll take to organize, outfit, and brief UN inspectors before they go to Iraq.

But Saddam faces special circumstances: Bush has vowed to oust Saddam regardless ("regime change"). Unless he’s willing to sacrifice his political stature and the prestige of the United States by backing down, Bush must go after Saddam’s scalp, inspections or not.

Is it possible Bush is exploring possible alternatives to an expensive, bloody war and a long occupation of Iraq; alternatives that could be executed even during weapons inspection?

The United States has a policy against assassinating heads of state. But our black bag operatives who wink at laws probably are discussing Saddam’s assassination or abduction to be tried as a war criminal.

We’ve offered $25 million for Osama bin Laden. Putting up another $25 million on Saddam’s head would be a powerful incentive for Iraqi dissidents or some of Saddam’s generals to take things into their own hands.

Maybe Israel is being courted on the sly for the job. Israelis are masters at abductions: in 1960, Mossad agents kidnapped onetime Nazi Gestapo bigwig Adolph Eichmann in Argentina and hustled him to Israel for trial, conviction and hanging. Israel takes out terrorist leaders, too, either with deadly air strikes or with Mossad hit squads.

To moralists who abhor assassination, there’s not much difference between Bush’s promise to remove Saddam: the likelihood is Saddam would choose martyrdom and go down shooting if U.S. forces swamp Baghdad with guns blazing.

A contract on Saddam would be cheaper in lives and money than a war involving 250,000 or more U.S. troops and 10 years of occupying Iraq.

The drawback is U.S. leaders would become targets for terrorist revenge. But that’s an unpleasant by-product if the U.S. is determined to use force in re-shaping "axis-of-evil" governments on its terms.

Then there’s the matter of terrorism in which President Bush promises victory. Americans should brace themselves for reality – promises of winning a war on terrorism build morale but don’t guarantee an outcome.

Victory has been promised by presidents in wars on drugs; street crime; welfare abuse; waste and fraud in government; corporate corruption; spousal and child abuse, and other social evils. We know how those wars have fared.

Even precisely defined wartime enemies aren’t always defeated. Even the Gulf War (1990-91) hasn’t ended: coalition air units continue to strike Saddam’s radar and missile sites and patrol Iraqi no-fly zones.

Terrorism persists everywhere as a condition of the mind rather than geography. Israel has fought terrorism since its founding in 1948. Spain can’t defeat Basque extremists. Asia and Africa are fraught with rebel terrorists. Bombings and assassinations are routine news from around the world. The British have been at it with Irish revolutionaries for decades.

Promises of winning the war on terrorism should be regarded with the same hopeful optimism as other promises: wonderful if achieved, but probably impossible. We’ll just keep trying.

 

The Idaho Mountain Express is distributed free to residents and guests throughout the Sun Valley, Idaho resort area community. Subscribers to the Idaho Mountain Express will read these stories and others in this week's issue.