Iraq Attack Not Justified

THE UNITED States is poised to strike Iraq. It has dismissed Iraq’s offer of talks on United Nations arms inspections.Post-Gulf War arms inspections, intended to stop Iraq from developing weapons of mass destruction, ended inconclusively four years ago when the inspectors left the country abruptly. But talk in the last few days has indicated that the US is poised for a military strike. President George Bush has repeated his call for a ‘regime change’ in Iraq.That is precisely where the US is getting it wrong. Washington is hell-bent on overthrowing Saddam Hussein. It appears more like a question of pride for America since it is a job that was, in US eyes, left undone when the Gulf War ended in 1991. Right now there is no consensus. US allies in Europe and the Middle East are opposed to a strike. Even within the American military and political establishment, there is strong opposition to a military adventure. Why?Military intervention abroad should be based on a direct but not peripheral threat to the respective country, hence the justification, for instance, of the US strike on Afghanistan in the wake of September 11. Otherwise simply wanting to forcefully put nasty leaders out of the way will only lead to chaos, because there are many nasty leaders littered all over the world anyway. Would these be similarly attacked?Secondly, the fallout can be disastrous. Right now the Middle East’s biggest problem is the incessant Palestinian-Israeli violence, and this requires US effort even the more. An unnecessary strike would needlessly alienate and breed fresh hostility to America, including extremism borne out of the absence of justice for oppressed Palestinians. America ought to use its vast might as the world’s sole superpower more judiciously.Ends