Monday, October 07, 2002

The one person who can stop the war

There's now just one person in the United States who can stop the invasion of Iraq. He's probably the only person in the entire world who can stop it. Saddam Hussein couldn't stop it, even if he gave UN inspectors the keys to Iraq on his way to retirement in Argentina--- unless maybe he does it after the November elections.

The only person who can stop this war cold, is Colin Powell.

Right now it doesn't look like he's inclined to stop it. On October 1, after Iraq and the UN inspectors agreed on a procedure and the American stock market shot up like a skyrocket, Secretary of State Colin Powell went out of his way to say that the old inspection process isn't good enough, and that the U.S. would push ahead with a UN resolution demanding full access, with the penalty spelled out.

But this may be a tactical move to outflank the war-fevered politicos in the White House. Powell also said that the UN resolution would naturally reflect the process of negotiation with other nations---that is, it might be a compromise. This puts him in the position of possibly getting some kind of resolution he can use within the administration as an argument against invasion. If Iraq hasn't done anything really egregious by then, this might work. Right now the Bushies are so self-inflamed and inflated that they won't take yes for an answer from Iraq or anybody else. Only Powell can slow them down.

Whether he will or not is an open question, but it seems unlikely that the Bushes can go ahead without him. Powell is the only person in the administration who is known and respected internationally. More to the point, he is the general who ran what was militarily an invasion of Iraq in the Gulf War. The Bushies need his support and participation desperately.

Even a glance at the current situation suggests why. There is little international support, and some important international opposition to this invasion. While the Bushies are using television pretty skillfully to create the drumbeat for war (not that this is too difficult), it's hard for anyone who's paying attention to avoid realizing that nobody has made a good case for why this "regime change" must occur right this very minute. There's been no clear and present danger demonstrated, and as the stock market reflects and many forecasters agree, a war is not likely to be good for a precarious economy. The only reason to be talking about this right now is to increase Republican chances in the congressional elections.

It's all part of a coordinated strategy. Republicans throughout the country are draping their TV ads in the red, white and blue, trumpeting their patriotism and calling into question the patriotism of Democrats. It wasn't a slip or a mere sentence, when President Bush castigated Democrats in Congress for concentrating on petty special interests ( you know-- like prescription drugs, the economy), and said they weren't concerned with national security. It is a political strategy.

Does everyone understand the political motive? That's also an open question. Democrats are scared to death of appearing to be political on a matter of war and peace, even though they all know that politics is what all the war noise is about. Congressional mail is running heavily against the war, and Democrats see it at 20 to one against or more, but those campaign ads scare them.

Of course, politics may not be the main reason. Politics might even be a smokescreen. It may also be that the representatives of Big Oil in the White House (which includes nearly everybody of any importance) are using the political argument to advance their own interests with a takeover of Iraq and possibly other areas of the Gulf.

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why this isn't delusional. The idea that the U.S. can run the Gulf region like an oil corporation is insane. They can't even run Afghanistan. An invasion of Iraq is at least equivalent to Vietnam in quagmire potential, but then this war isn't being led by the best and the brightest. They're looking more like the worst and the dumbest.

But it's the insanity of the situation that may offer the greatest hope, because Colin Powell, even though a Republican, does not appear to be crazy. He is going to look at what it takes in personnel and technology, in logistics and costs, to first of all successfully invade Iraq and take down Saddam. That might be relatively easy, but costly (not that we'll know the cost for years to come), or it may take a long time and be very obviously costly in every possible way.

But then he's going to look at what comes next. "Regime change" sounds so simple. But the last time America with a huge coalition behind it invaded Iraq---led by Colin Powell--- the march to Baghdad was stopped short. Why? Could it be that Powell knew that the cost of regime change was beyond what the coalition would commit to doing, in resources, attention and time?

This time is different. It's worse. There isn't even a coalition. Last time in the Gulf the American military did most of the warfare, and the coalition mostly paid for it. Guess who pays for the whole thing this time? Odd how the tax cuts for the wealthy will be kicking in right about then.

But if Powell and others manage to string out the preparations past the November elections (and maybe that's the plan anyway), a short hangover may be followed by more sober assessments. Still, there may come a time when Powell has to step up, lay out the facts, and even lay down the law.

If Powell is ultimately against an invasion, how could it possibly happen? The Cheney wing would probably like to see him resign, but not on the eve of the largest military operation of the twenty-first century so far. Not when he is the most prominent African American in a government leadership role, and a lot of the men and women who will actually have to do the fighting, killing and dying are African Americans. They have little in common with the rest of the Bushies, for their veins do not run with oil, and their parachutes are not made of gold.

If it comes to a war he believes is a mistake, will Powell go along with his Commander in Chief, or will Bush blink first? It's possible Powell would publicly support an invasion he privately opposes, just because it's patriotic. But somehow I doubt it. He's the best known American military figure, and he won't be able to hide from the media or international leaders. He has his own credibility and his effectiveness as a leader to worry about, if he's trying to defend what he doesn't believe in. That might work if he was more of a politician or less prominent. His choice would be between waffling and hiding, and either choice would tend to undermine the administration.

He could also focus all his power on providing American troops with what they need for an overwhelming military victory, discharging his duty to them. But can he then turn his back on the chaos that would ensue in the region, or the fate of the occupying force over time, when the slow accumulation of death is no longer fodder for the 24/7 media frenzy of the month? If asked about any other Bushie, the question would be rhetorical. But Powell might be able to translate his sense of duty from just the military he once commanded to the country he now serves.

America suffered a great trauma last September 11. Only a sober assessment of both threats and actions to neutralize the threats will make anyone safer from terrorism. The most terrifying aspect of the current leadership is its appearance of being both cynically manipulative and seriously out of control. For more than a year now, Osama bin Laden has been the devil incarnate, but he never gave the Bushies the satisfaction of becoming a visible bloody body. So they have to go after the ever reliable Saddam. At least they know where he lives.

America needs somebody to bring some sobriety to this White House. Maybe time will do the job, and the tide of opinion and protest. But just because this invasion is crazy in so many ways doesn't mean it won't happen. World War I was insane, and lots of people at the time knew it. This is how some wars start. So I expect that Colin Powell is going to be at the center of one of the more fateful backstage dramas of the next few months in Washington, DC.

No comments: