http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2003/0304syria.html

The Law of Unintended Consequences: Will the War in Iraq Spur Proliferation?

By Ian Williams | April 14, 2003

Editor: John Gershman, Interhemispheric Resource Center (IRC)
Editor's Note: This piece was commissioned under the auspices of the 
Project Against the Present Danger.

Foreign Policy In Focus
www.fpif.org

When the British burned huge piles of dead farm animals to eradicate 
foot and mouth disease, one of the unforeseen consequences was that 
the highly infective virus was lifted on the plumes of smoke, and 
spread even further. We can foresee that the war that was waged to 
rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction may have similar 
consequences, unforeseen as so often, by the Bush administration.

Just in case Arabs or anyone else was worried that the attack on Iraq 
was just the beginning, Assistant Secretary of State for Disarmament 
Affairs John Bolton has rushed to reassure them. Speaking on the 
U.S.-financed Arabic radio station Radio Sawa, his message was clear: 
Iraq is just the start of a new crusade. "Our evidence is very 
convincing that since the Security Council suspended sanctions 
because of Pan Am 103, that the government of Libya has substantially 
increased its efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction," he 
said. Bolton, who has in the past unilaterally elongated the Axis of 
Evil to include Libya, Syria, Cuba, and North Korea, this time only 
fingered the Middle East. He concluded his interview with, "We are 
hoping that the elimination of the dictatorial regime of Saddam 
Hussein and the elimination of all of Iraq's weapons of mass 
destruction would be important lessons to other countries in the 
region, particularly Syria, Libya, and Iran, that the cost of their 
pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially quite high." 
The implications of the statement are considerable, coming as it does 
from the man who went to Israel two months ago to promise Ariel 
Sharon that "it will be necessary to deal with threats from Syria, 
Iran, and North Korea afterwards."

 

The New Crusade?

It is not in fact against international law to possess weapons of 
mass destruction, nor is there any Security Council resolution 
forbidding Libya, Iran, Syria, or other countries from holding them. 
(Iraq was a specific case following its military defeat after its 
occupation of Kuwait.) There are conventions against chemical and 
biological weapons, and there is the nuclear non-proliferation 
treaty. But the U.S. itself set a precedent when it unilaterally 
"unsigned," the Rome Treaty setting up the International Criminal 
Court and when it revoked the Anti-Ballistic Missile pact with 
Moscow. Any country can refuse to sign these conventions, or follow 
in the footsteps of the U.S. and withdraw from them.

The UN resolution that forbade Iraqi ownership of such weapons did so 
in the context of working toward a nuclear-free zone in the Middle 
East. Only someone who thinks that irony was what they made next 
after the bronze age could stand up in Israel and talk about 
disarmament in the region without mentioning his hosts' large nuclear 
arsenal! Indeed, it is not often nowadays that one hears Washington 
complain about Indian and Pakistani nuclear weapons.

Since the official excuse for invading Iraq was its possession of 
forbidden weapons, we can wonder why the Iraqis did not use them if 
they have them. More worrying for the Syrians is that the search for 
banned weapons in Iraq is not going the way that Washington 
strategists war-gamed. They might turn up yet, but as the statues of 
Saddam fell in Baghdad, no one had found any yet.

If no weapons are unearthed, however, we will hear even more 
accusations that the weapons must be hidden in Syria. Of the list of 
likely villains, Syria--Israel's neighbor--is shaping up to be the 
strongest candidate for the next war of "liberation," "disarmament," 
or "democratization." The administration is already preparing the 
reasons why Syria should be the next in line--for arming Saddam, for 
hosting his hidden weapons, for being a dictatorship, for supporting 
terrorism, and since Iraq has fallen, for being the only military 
threat to Israel. In this they are helped by singularly inept 
diplomacy by Damascus, which bravely, if foolishly, became the only 
rat to jump on a sinking ship when it kissed and made up with Baghdad 
after decades of vicious inter-Baathist struggle.

 

The Incentives to Proliferate WMD

The early indications of Washington's intentions were contained in 
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's heavy-handed statements 
threatening to punish Syria for alleged exports of weapons to Iraq. 
Just in case the much-desired WMD don't turn up soon, Israeli 
intelligence chief Gen. Yossi Kupperwasser has already told a Knesset 
committee that "it is possible Iraq transferred missiles and weapons 
of mass destruction into Syria." While General Richard Myers, 
chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says that there is no evidence 
to substantiate that claim, that assessment is doubtless subject to 
change if the White House decides it is inconvenient.

The U.S. has also complained about Syrian as well as Iranian 
sponsorship of "terrorist" organizations like Hezbollah. Although no 
countries except Israel and Washington define Hezbollah as 
terrorists, the Bush administration's promiscuous use of the word 
"terrorist" is geared toward a domestic audience--a strategy that 
worked very well in the case of Iraq. Much popular support in the 
U.S. for the war in Iraq was predicated on the erroneous assumption 
that Saddam Hussein was behind, or least alongside Osama bin Laden 
and the September 11th attacks. Indeed, President Bush's notification 
to Congress justified the invasion on those grounds.

So the administration is already placing President Al Assad in its 
sights, for arming Saddam, for hosting his hidden weapons, for 
supporting terrorism, and it would have very little difficulty in, 
correctly, proving the Syrian Baathists to be every bit as vicious 
and undemocratic as their Iraqi comrades. Now Rumsfeld is accusing 
Syria of harboring Iraqi leaders, "We are getting scraps of 
intelligence saying that Syria has been cooperative in facilitating 
the move of the people out of Iraq and into Syria," he inelegantly 
told a Washington press conference.

If Damascus is indeed foolhardy enough to host Saddam Hussein, then 
the fundamentalists in Washington will almost certainly take the whip 
hand. Following a relatively casualty-free war for the U.S. in Iraq, 
there would be little difficulty in getting domestic support for an 
attack on Syria. There is, of course, neither legal justification nor 
a UN mandate for such an attack. But having just flouted 
international law and the UN Security Council to go after Iraq, with 
hardly a peep from the rest of the world, it is difficult to see that 
holding the administration back.

The implications are worrying. Across the world, governments will be 
drawing some disturbing conclusions. No conventional forces can stand 
up against the U.S. in the usual type of warfare. The great levelers 
are terrorism, which is impervious to the huge boosts in Pentagon 
spending on technology, and weapons of mass destruction, particularly 
nuclear missiles. In the new age of high technology conventional 
warfare, a nuclear weapon is a cheap alternative.

It does not require sophisticated analysis to compare the respective 
fates of North Korea and Iraq and to draw the necessary conclusions. 
The lesson is to follow in the footsteps that India and Pakistan hid 
so successfully until the last moment: Equip yourself clandestinely 
with weapons that will make even the fundamentalists in the White 
House think twice before attacking.

The war fought ostensibly to disarm Iraq will almost certainly lead 
to nuclear proliferation and the armament of the rest of the world. 
While, for the time being at least, many people in Iraq will indeed 
rejoice at the overthrow of their tyrant--the rest of us have 
genuine, somewhat selfish, reasons for regret.

(Ian Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> contributes frequently to Foreign 
Policy in Focus (online at www.fpif.org) on UN and international 
affairs.)


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Make Money Online Auctions! Make $500.00 or We Will Give You Thirty Dollars for 
Trying!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/yMx78A/fNtFAA/AG3JAA/FGYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

Biofuels list archives:
http://archive.nnytech.net/

Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address.
To unsubscribe, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ 


Reply via email to