3 January 2003

Dear Editor,

              There remains little doubt that the United States will attack Iraq in order to dispose of Saddam Hussein and his mass destructive weapons. As of the first week of January, American military deployments to the Persian Gulf increase. In broad terms of strategy, such a war involves difficult problems for American foreign policy which most common people might not realize.

              The policy of political containment of Iraq failed to change the internal nature of its government. It did, on the other hand, change the country's international behavior. Once the mightest military power in the region, Iraq has no allies and cannot seriously threaten its neighbors except through terrorism by using nuclear, biological, or chemical (NBC) weapons. It has some power to change the balance of interest in the Middle East.

              Saddam Hussein's possession of NBC weapons enables the Iraqi leader to deter a regional second rate power, such as Iran or Syria or Israel, from interfering with his rule. Iraq's recent history has tragic circumstances; however, its reduced status can only indirectly threaten the flow of Persian Gulf oil.

              The original Bush Administration reason for attacking Iraq centered on the possibility of Hussein giving NBC weapons to terrorist and attacking his neighbors. The reason expanded to removing an evil dictator and reforming the country into a modern Westernized democracy, a missionary attempt to improve living standards in the region.

              It has taken a year of diplomacy for the American government to win Congressional approval, UN support, and coalition backing for an attempt to disarm Iraq. Iran, under an anti-American fundamentalist leadership, has a nuclear program supported by America's friends, the Russian government. The CIA estimates that North Korea already has two crude atomic weapons and will soon have several more. As the three parts of the designated "axis of evil," without doubt Iraq, Iran, and North Korea have talked among themselves about how to respond to America's crusade to stamp out "evil."

              America can handle one small war, like that against terrorism taking place in several regions of the world, and one large war, against Iraq. The US military has tailored doctrine and force structure to do that. We cannot handle a short-sighted diplomacy which fails to prevent Iran intervening on behalf of Iraq, adding a second large war, or North Korea from breaking out of its isolation in an attempt to unify the divided peninsula through force. Add a third large war. With all of this potential upheaval and political turmoil in the world, what would stop China from attacking Taiwan while America focuses its attention elsewhere, or extorting control over the island from America in exchange for neutrality.

              These problems demand more discussion of the options and consequences of the Bush Doctrine and American foreign policy. The problem could cost us our real security.

Sincerely,