john hewson on iraq

By John Hewson, Dean of The Macquarie Graduate School of
Management.

Sydney - Monday - February 10: (RWE) - While there is no doubt
that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is a monstrous dictator, I doubt
that he's an idiot.
His credentials as a monster are unquestioned.
As we were reminded in the parliamentary debate this week,
Hussein has without provocation invaded Iran and Kuwait, fired missiles
at Saudi Arabia, Israel, Bahrain and Qatar, bullied, threatened and
extorted Syria, Jordan and the Gulf states, supported Palestinian
suicide bombers and certain terrorist organisations, and has apparently
continued to develop and hide weapons of mass destruction, which at
times he has used against his own people.
But I doubt he's just sitting there watching the US, with the
support of others, manipulate US and world opinion in support of an
invasion of his country, with or without UN sanction.
Yet, to a very large extent, the almost saturation media
coverage of the potential invasion of Iraq rarely recognises that
perhaps Hussein has a strategy of his own.
One of the most important, yet constantly avoided, questions in
the so-called Australian debate about our involvement in the committed
invasion of Iraq concerns the precise nature of our terms of engagement.
Exactly what risks will our troops and aircraft face?
This surely depends importantly on how Hussein reacts to the
committed invasion.
Most of the media seem to believe that the committed invasion of
Iraq will result in a clean, quick war, if you can have such a thing.
That is, that the US, with our without the backing of others,
will simply find Hussein, kill him, thereby achieving the desired regime
change, and move on. Return to life as normal.
Indeed, one or our leading foreign editors, Greg Sheridan, this
week made a specific prediction: "A swift liberation of Iraq will see
public opinion come around and the Howard government vindicated."
I hope he's right. Perhaps the might of America will easily
swamp whatever is put in its way.
Yet with all the hoopla about the accuracy of the US precision
bombing in the Gulf War, which dominated our television screens nightly,
by choice or otherwise, Saddam Hussein is still alive.
What is Hussein's strategy? I'm keen to see the question
addressed and debated, especially in the context of the increasingly
enthusiastic embracing of invasion.
The only mention of Hussein's strategy in Prime Minister John
Howard's parliamentary speech this week was by reference to "his
ambition to dominate his region".
The supposition is that, in part, he wants to take substantial
control of the world oil supply.
Interestingly, Howard said this week that it was "outrageous" to
claim that US behaviour was driven by a wish to take control of Iraq's
oil reserves!
Simplistically, isn't it possible that a principal strategic
objective of Hussein is to engage the US directly in the Middle East
rather than indirectly as an unquestioning backer of Israel?
In such circumstances, won't Hussein try to make it as difficult
and costly a war as possible for the invaders?
Won't he make them fight in the streets of Baghdad, potentially
killing thousands of innocents?
Further, if Hussein does have a significant arsenal of weapons
of mass destruction, won't he use them in response to any invasion, not
only against the US troops but perhaps firing them on Israel and other
neighbours?
While we all hope that it could be a quick and clean war, isn't
the downside risk that of a full-blown Middle East war?
Won't it be necessary to rebuild Iraq and have to maintain a
presence there for a considerable time to preserve the new-found
government, and the new-found peace and the refugee problem?
Australia's problem is that we are already in this conflict up
to our necks.
Despite Howard's
assurances, I sincerely doubt that you can deploy Australian forces and
participate in "contingency planning" with the US military and then just
pull them out when the invasion begins.
Surely we should have publicly debated the risks we face.
Surely the government should have demonstrated that it is
clearly in our national interest to be part of a war in the Middle East,
rather than working in other ways, through other channels, to contain
the development of weapons of mass destruction and potential activities
of rogue states.
So far, Hussein has successfully divided the world, Are we being
suckered?
Source: The Australian Financial Review