September 7th 2002

  Buy Issue 2641

Articles from this issue:

COVER STORY: It was right for Australia to be in Vietnam

EDITORIAL: The family: an endangered species

CANBERRA OBSERVED: Self-destructing Democrats: the real winners

COMMENT: Trial by media: the attacks on Archbishop Pell

MIDDLE EAST: Why Bush is unlikely to attack Iraq

STRAWS IN THE WIND: Russian roulette / Thick skins and strong stomachs

FAMILY: Child predators: the untold story

STEM CELL DEBATE: MPs smell a rat over Trounson's stem cell claim

Telstra sale (letter)

An honourable man (letter)

ENVIRONMENT: How now, brown cloud?

POLITICS: Principles and pragmatism: the Democrats' demise

ASIA: Singapore: hard work the key to success

West Papua 40 years on

BOOKS: Cutting Edge Bioethics, edited by John Kilner

Books promotion page

Why Bush is unlikely to attack Iraq

by Peter Westmore

News Weekly, September 7, 2002
Last week, US Vice-President, Dick Cheney, upped the ante on Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, indicating that President Bush, as Commander-in-Chief of America's armed forces, could, if necessary, commence war on the Iraqi dictator, without Congressional approval, in light of his attempts to obtain chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction.

While Washington's rhetoric against Saddam has reached its highest pitch, there is every reason to believe that it is just that: rhetoric, rather than part of a strategic plan.

The strongest reason to believe that the US Administration is talking, rather than planning a pre-emptive strike, is that America's allies in Western Europe and the Middle East have publicly declared their opposition to such an action, and without their support the United States would have limited access to air bases needed for both army and air operations.

There are, however, several other reasons. The United States faces continuing problems in nearby Afghanistan, where US forces are still on the ground.

Despite the overthrow of the Taliban regime, the newly-installed government has little authority outside Kabul, and the country is once again run by regional warlords.

Their power to undermine the new regime is a constant threat to the present government, as evident in the fact that US military personnel have been obliged to provide security to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, following the assassination of one of the country's Vice-Presidents in Kabul.

Last month, the State Department was reported to be planning to take over security for President Karzai, including training a local security force for the leader.

Under the plan, members of the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service will replace US troops, who took over from Mr. Karzai's Afghan guards in July.

It is unlikely that Washington would assume responsibility for a new government in Iraq, when its attempts to establish a secure government in Afghanistan have not succeeded.

Additionally, the US could scarcely envisage a military assault on Saddam without deployment of massive ground forces which, in the urban areas of Iraq, including Baghdad, would probably kill many innocent civilians and many American soldiers.

A probable explanation for Washington's talk about attacking Iraq is that the US Administration is trying to force Saddam to accept a resumption of international inspections of Iraqi military installations unconditionally. In light of the dictator's contemptuous expulsion of UN inspectors several years ago, only the strongest possible pressure will bring him to accept such a presence now.

In the meantime, with Congressional elections due in Washington in November, tough talk against the Iraqi dictator will win support for an Administration which faces severe domestic pressure as a result of the economic slowdown, the decline of the stock market, and the multi-billion dollar collapse of a number of major US corporations which had indulged in fraudulent business practices.

  • Peter Westmore

Join email list

Join e-newsletter list

Your cart has 0 items

Subscribe to NewsWeekly

Research Papers

Trending articles

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Memo to Shorten, Wong: LGBTIs don't want it

COVER STORY Shorten takes low road to defeat marriage plebiscite

COVER STORY Reaper mows down first child in the Low Countries

COVER STORY Bill Shorten imposes his political will on the nation

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE Kevin Andrews: defend marriage on principles

CANBERRA OBSERVED Coalition still gridlocked despite foreign success

ENVIRONMENT More pseudo science from climate

News and views from around the world

Menzies, myth and modern Australia (Jonathan Pincus)

China’s utterly disgraceful human-rights record

Japan’s cure for childlessness: a robot (Marcus Roberts)

SOGI laws: a subversive response to a non-existent problem (James Gottry)

Shakespeare, Cervantes and the romance of the real (R.V. Young)

That’s not funny: PC and humour (Anthony Sacramone)

Refugees celebrate capture of terror suspect

The Spectre of soft totalitarianism (Daniel Mahoney)

American dream more dead than you thought (Eric Levitz)

Think the world is overcrowded: These 10 maps show why you’re wrong (Max Galka)

© Copyright 2011
Last Modified:
November 14, 2015, 11:18 am