Iraq - There Are Choices

Only a military campaign will end the threat Saddam Hussein and his Ba'ath Party Government poses to his people, the region and international security. This seems to be the perception shared by the White House and the US Departments of State and Defence. Ignored are the messages brought back by US Vice-President Cheney from his recent trip to the Middle East and Europe. What he heard there was unmistakenly clear: we are with you in the fight against terrorism, we want to see a democratic Iraq as much as you do but we can not support you in bringing about changes in Iraq through military confrontation. What Washington conveniently overlooks as well is that the lone European ally, Tony Blair, is confronted with strong and growing dissent within his own Labour Party against a UK military alliance in a war with Iraq.

Recent assurances in Mexico by President Bush at the UN Conference on Aid that causes of dissent and inequality must be tackled along with the fight against terrorism offers the US a genuine opportunity to embark on new policy initiatives for conflict resolution and global poverty reduction. Promoting peace while fighting terrorism would provide the double pronged instrument needed to show the kind of leadership the world expects from the United States. Part of such an initiative should be to seek a non-military solution to the Iraq conflict.

Options linked to a military confrontation against Iraq overlook geopolitical realities as they have evolved. Iraq can no longer be seen in isolation from the rest of the Middle East. To speak of the Middle East peace process has become a misnomer if it refers only to the western edge of the region.

Intelligence analysis has not detected convincingly any links between Iraq and international terrorism nor has it confirmed an existing capacity of Iraq to produce weapons of mass destruction. The recent decision by the UK Government not to publish a report claiming to show that Iraq remained in possession of WMD is further evidence to this effect. It also enhances the significance of the statement by former Secretary of Defence William Cohen when he briefed incoming President Bush on 10 January 2001 that Iraq no longer constituted a military threat to its neighbours.What is known without doubt, on the other hand, is that the Iraqi people continue to suffer immensely, primarily because of economic sanctions. Should there be war they would pay another heavy price.

These realities squarely make the case for a non-military solution. Its adoption would have an immediate and significant political dividend in terms of support and good will for the US fight against terrorism. The international community has the right to demand such an act of statemanship from the United States.

At the end of their summit in Beirut in late March, all twenty two Arab governments, in their final statement, cautioned against "threats of aggression against…Arab States" and stressed their "categorical rejection of attacking Iraq". Tension has undeniably eased between the adversaries in the Gulf. A process of reconciliation, timid as it is at this stage, has nevertheless begun in earnest. Equally significant, talks between the UN Secretary General and the Iraqis have resumed in early March, the first since February 2001. Disarmament experts from both sides are part of these talks. A UN human rights rapporteur went to Iraq in February, the first visit of its kind in over ten years. Intra-Iraq talks between Kurds and Baghdad continue to be held at regular intervals.

Glaring attempts to disinform can not hide this progress at three levels. The international community should strongly support these positive developments. These can be the keys to a constructive new approach in dealing with Iraq. A pre-condition for success will be a US foreign policy shift for the region. Ingredients for such a change would have to be US support for 1. Resumed talks between the UN Secretary General and Iraq 2. Eventual interaction between the UN Security Council and Iraq 3. Arab League sponsored mediation between Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Iraq 4. Talks between Kurds and Baghdad 5. The lifting of economic sanctions, once agreement has been reached between the UN and Iraq on arms inspection 6. Consultations between the EU, Russia, China and the US as well as governments in the region on a post-sanction normalization process.

No one doubts that this is a formidable package of challenges. The need for peace and stability in a region which has suffered so severely offers no other solution.

Hans- C. Graf Sponeck is a former
UN Assistant Secretary General and
Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq