Posted on 1-8-2002

Iraq Splitting US Down Middle
By JOSEPH R. BIDEN Jr. and RICHARD G. LUGAR, in NY Times 31 July 2002

WASHINGTON — Through tragedy and pain, Americans have learned a great deal
this past year about why foreign policy matters. In recent months,
President Bush has made clear his determination to remove Iraqi dictator
Saddam Hussein from power — a goal many of us in Congress share. But to
date we've seen only leaked reports of competing military plans. These have
reflected deep divisions within the administration about whether and how to
proceed. The time has come for a serious discussion of American policy
toward Iraq.

The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will begin in-depth hearings today.
While the White House supports the hearings — which have been coordinated
closely by Democrats and Republicans on the committee — administration
officials will not participate at this time lest the president be put in
the position of having to make critical decisions prematurely. Without
prejudging any particular course of action — including the possibility of
staying with nonmilitary options — we hope to start a national discussion
of some critical questions.

First, what threat does Iraq pose to our security? How immediate is the
danger? President Bush is right to be concerned about Saddam Hussein's
relentless pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. It's true that other
regimes hostile to the United States and our allies have, or seek to
acquire, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. What makes Mr. Hussein
unique is that he has actually used them — against his own people and
against his Iranian neighbors. And for nearly four years, Iraq has blocked
the return of United Nations weapons inspectors. We need to explore Mr.
Hussein's track record in acquiring, making and using weapons of mass
destruction and the likelihood he would share them with terrorists. We also
need a clear assessment of his current capabilities, including conventional
forces and weapons.

Second, what are the possible responses to the Iraqi threat? The
containment strategy pursued by the United States since the end of the
Persian Gulf war has kept Mr. Hussein boxed in. Continuing the containment
strategy, coupled with a tough weapons-inspection program, is one option.
But it raises the risk that Mr. Hussein will play cat-and-mouse with
inspectors while building more weapons and selling them to those who would
use them against us. If we wait for the danger to become clear and present,
it may be too late. That is why some believe removing Mr. Hussein from
power is the better course.

A military response poses other problems. Some argue that by attacking Mr.
Hussein, we might precipitate the very thing we are trying to prevent: his
use of weapons of mass destruction. There also is concern he might try to
spark a regional war. We must determine whether resources can be shifted to
a major military undertaking in Iraq without compromising the war on terror
elsewhere. We have to ask how much military intervention would cost and
consider its likely impact on our economy. And we need to determine what
level of support we are likely to get from allies in the Middle East and
Europe.

Third, when Saddam Hussein is gone, what would be our responsibilities?
This question has not been explored but may prove to be the most critical.
In Afghanistan, the war was prosecuted successfully, but many of us believe
our commitment to security and reconstruction there has fallen short. Given
Iraq's strategic location, its large oil reserves and the suffering of the
Iraqi people, we cannot afford to replace a despot with chaos.

We need to assess what it would take to rebuild Iraq economically and
politically. Addressing these questions now would demonstrate to the Iraqi
people that we are committed for the long haul. Iraq's neighbors would
breathe easier if they knew the future had been thought through in detail.
The American people, whose sons and daughters may be put in harm's way,
need to have that same sense of assurance. Simply put, we need to know
everything possible about the risks of action and of inaction. Ignoring
these factors could lead us into something for which the American public is
wholly unprepared.

Joseph R. Biden Jr. is the chairman and Richard Lugar the acting ranking
minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.