Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US must use its sword, or else...
Straights Times (Singapore) ^ | 2-10-03 | FAREED ZAKARIA

Posted on 02/10/2003 4:21:44 PM PST by SJackson

US must use its sword, or else...

IF IT turns out the American President is bluffing about 'serious consequences', what will happen the next time the United States makes threats?

When a policy-maker says we should do something 'to maintain our credibility', it conjures up a tragic event - Vietnam. The experts all agree we foolishly bloodied ourselves and slaughtered others just to prove we wouldn't back down.

But with Iraq, the need to maintain resolve seems obvious. I cannot see how America can back down without damaging its, well, credibility.

Imagine the situation. A week from now, pressured by France, Germany and Russia, the US decides to give the United Nations inspectors more time. Though President George W. Bush has said repeatedly he would have 'zero tolerance' for Iraqi deception, he didn't really mean it.

What would happen the next time the US made threats? And what about America's allies? Washington has pushed countries like Kuwait, Qatar and Turkey to stick their necks out and support it in a very dangerous neighbourhood.

European states like Spain, Italy and Poland have dared to break with the Franco-German juggernaut, a move that could cost them dearly within the European Union. British Prime Minister Tony Blair has supported US action despite the fact that a majority of his Cabinet, his party, his Parliament and his country oppose a war. If the US administration were to cut and run now, what would America's reputation be with these leaders?

Think also about the effect it would have on countries such as France and Russia. Would they not decide that undermining American policy works?

And consider the effect on the adversary. Mr Saddam has already made clear what he believes. In his November interview with Egyptian weekly Al Usbou, he said: 'We have to buy some more time, and the American-British coalition will disintegrate because of internal reasons and because of the pressure of public opinion in the American and British street.'

UNDER CLOSE WATCH

AND what will other adversaries think of US threats? At this very moment, the US is trying to persuade another rogue regime not to acquire nuclear weapons. US East Asian expert Thomas Christensen said: 'There's no doubt that North Korea is watching what we do in Iraq very closely. It would be incredibly dangerous to back down now.'

In Vietnam, America could not win against an enemy consumed with nationalist passion and should have realised it more quickly. But even in Vietnam, there was a case for credibility - though it became greatly exaggerated.

In Mr Henry Kissinger's new book, Ending The Vietnam War, he points out that the US could not simply abandon South Vietnam after four presidents of both political parties had declared that its survival was crucial to American national security.

When America did leave, the international climate was affected. As Mr Kissinger notes, within six months of Saigon's fall, a Cuban expeditionary force appeared in Angola. Soviet and Cuban adventurism across the Third World picked up substantially. Three years later, the Shah of Iran was toppled. Then US diplomats were taken hostage in Teheran. Of course, local politics contributed, but Mr Kissinger wonders how much these developments were influenced by the fact that America's enemies were increasingly convinced 'that the wave of history was on their side'.

A senior Asian diplomat told me recently that before this month, he had never fully understood the saying: 'When you have drawn your sword, you must use it.' He added: 'But watching the current confrontation between the US and Iraq, it's clear. You've drawn your sword. Now you must use it.'


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS:
As Mr Kissinger notes, within six months of Saigon's fall, a Cuban expeditionary force appeared in Angola. Soviet and Cuban adventurism across the Third World picked up substantially. Three years later, the Shah of Iran was toppled. Then US diplomats were taken hostage in Teheran

Those, btw, are the dominoes the liberals would tell you never fell, across Africa and Central America. Add the ongoing plight of Cambodia and Vietnam to the dominoes as well.

1 posted on 02/10/2003 4:21:44 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Yehuda; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; ...
If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
2 posted on 02/10/2003 4:22:06 PM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Given that this guy is writing from Singapore, he should talk to Lee Kuan Yew about why we couldn't simply walk away from South Vietnam. And why, even though we lost, our efforts in Vietnam were still important because we bought time for other countries in the region such as Thailand, Singapore, the Phillipines, etc. to hold back the Communist menace.
3 posted on 02/10/2003 4:54:49 PM PST by vbmoneyspender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Failure is not an option.
4 posted on 02/10/2003 4:54:51 PM PST by prairiebreeze ("We won't deny, ignore or pass our problems along to other Presidents" --GWBush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Imagine the situation. A week from now, pressured by France, Germany and Russia, the US decides to give the United Nations inspectors more time.

Part of the Franco-Prussian-Flemish plan is to leave the US troops in the ME on standby.

This won't happen. If they don't go into Iraq, they will come home or move closer to NK.

5 posted on 02/10/2003 5:01:08 PM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
Part of the Franco-Prussian-Flemish plan is to leave the US troops in the ME on standby.

Right and wait for the heat to build up in the desert
6 posted on 02/10/2003 5:10:16 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Comment #7 Removed by Moderator

To: SJackson
Ridiculous.

I don't care how Bush gets what he wants.

If he bluffs it out of Saddam, so much the better.

If Saddam won't be budged and Bush takes him out, then that's the best, isn't it?
8 posted on 02/10/2003 5:14:27 PM PST by xzins (Babylon - You have been weighed in the balance and been found wanting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
"But with Iraq, the need to maintain resolve seems obvious. I cannot see how America can back down without damaging its, well, credibility."


Back down. We can't wait to watch the bombs fall on TV.

9 posted on 02/10/2003 5:47:10 PM PST by bulldogs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It would be better if it could be resolved peacefully, but dissarmament isn't what Bush really wants. The problem with dissarmament is it does nothing to prevent terrorism of which Saddam is a major player.

If Bush can bluff Saddam into stepping down or his generals into seizing power from him, that would be great.

Otherwise he needs to go.

The world shouldn't expect the US to leave it's troops sitting around Saddam forever, nor should we allow them to put us in that position. When we are ready we should take Saddam out.

10 posted on 02/10/2003 7:53:45 PM PST by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DannyTN
We agree.

The best is to rid the world of Saddam.
11 posted on 02/10/2003 7:58:19 PM PST by xzins (Babylon - You have been weighed in the balance and been found wanting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: vbmoneyspender
You are so right about that. We did buy time for the other countries in the region.
12 posted on 02/10/2003 8:15:02 PM PST by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
One thing is for certain Russia sticking its head into this will not stop the war machine from advancing to its objective this go round!
13 posted on 02/10/2003 8:26:06 PM PST by Soul Citizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson