What if it’s all just a game? In recent weeks, George W. Bush has accused Saddam Hussein of bad sportsmanship in Iraq’s dealings with the United Nations and the western powers. According to Mr. Bush, Mr. Hussein advances and retreats, “crawfishes,” cooperates one day and impedes the next. George Bush is right, that’s exactly what Saddam Hussein does. Saddam behaves like a truculent teenager, cooperating just enough to avoid punishment and as soon as he’s put of the doghouse, he starts to push the limits again.
This week, Saddam decided he’s pushed his luck far enough for now. George Bush seemed on the verge of obtaining war approval from Congress and the UN, American and British war planes are pre-emptively pounding Iraqi defenses in the no-fly zone, B-2 bombers are moving toward the Indian Ocean, so Saddam announced UN weapons inspectors may return to Iraq, no strings attached.
What if it’s all just a game? For weeks, the U.S. press has been running “wag the dog” scenarios. We’ve been reminded that the Bush administration has yet to make a case for waging war against Iraq at this time. There has been much speculation that all the recent war talk is driven by polls and the midterm elections, that this is just a way to distract the press and public away from the slumping economy, the CEO scandals and the questionable business histories of Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Last Sunday, the Washington Post ran a long article about the huge oil deposits sitting under Iraq and how American oil companies are eager to get in and start pumping after the U.S. Army deposes Saddam.
So what if Saddam Hussein, advancing and retreating, crawfishing, decides to start playing the game? By accepting unconditional UN inspection – or at least saying (for now) he’ll accept unconditional UN inspections, Mr. Hussein has changed the political geography. The Arab League, which ha been slowly coming around to the American position, is now saying Saddam should be given time to demonstrate his good faith. Ditto for the Russians, an important vote on the Security Council. If Saddam says he’s ready to begin complying with past UN resolutions, getting new ones passed will be more difficult.
This could be a good thing. If the world situation is not a game, if we are sincere in our statements about wanting to see a reduction in weapons of mass destruction, then this week’s events could be good news. This week’s news might mean consultation and coalition building work. It might mean armed confrontation is not our only means of resolving disputes. If this is all not a game, if this is for real, this week’s events might mean containment and negotiation can work, if given the chance.
But what if it’s all just a game? Saddam isn’t stupid; he follows the American press, too. He’s playing the same game as Bush and Cheney and it’s not just Mideast politics, it’s American politics. Mideast tensions and American elections have been bedfellows since Ronald Reagan worried about an “October Surprise” coming out of Teheran in 1980. The White House plays along, sending out spokespeople to jeer at Saddam, calling his offer just another disingenuous ploy.
Problem is, there’s plenty of disingenuity to go around. In this game, Saddam’s offer means the Bush momentum toward war slows. Bad news about the economy might start to creep back onto the front pages before November fifth. If George Bush wants to stay in the game, he’s got to raise the stakes. The day Saddam agreed to inspections, the White House moved the goal line, saying the Iraq situation is about disarmament, not inspections.
The difference between peace and war should not be a game, but that’s the way it appears. The stakes look like human lives.
Only a Game
What if it’s all just a game? In recent weeks, George W. Bush has accused Saddam Hussein of bad sportsmanship in Iraq’s dealings with the United Nations and the western powers. According to Mr. Bush, Mr. Hussein advances and retreats, “crawfishes,” cooperates one day and impedes the next. George Bush is right, that’s exactly what Saddam Hussein does. Saddam behaves like a truculent teenager, cooperating just enough to avoid punishment and as soon as he’s put of the doghouse, he starts to push the limits again.
This week, Saddam decided he’s pushed his luck far enough for now. George Bush seemed on the verge of obtaining war approval from Congress and the UN, American and British war planes are pre-emptively pounding Iraqi defenses in the no-fly zone, B-2 bombers are moving toward the Indian Ocean, so Saddam announced UN weapons inspectors may return to Iraq, no strings attached.
What if it’s all just a game? For weeks, the U.S. press has been running “wag the dog” scenarios. We’ve been reminded that the Bush administration has yet to make a case for waging war against Iraq at this time. There has been much speculation that all the recent war talk is driven by polls and the midterm elections, that this is just a way to distract the press and public away from the slumping economy, the CEO scandals and the questionable business histories of Mr. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney. Last Sunday, the Washington Post ran a long article about the huge oil deposits sitting under Iraq and how American oil companies are eager to get in and start pumping after the U.S. Army deposes Saddam.
So what if Saddam Hussein, advancing and retreating, crawfishing, decides to start playing the game? By accepting unconditional UN inspection – or at least saying (for now) he’ll accept unconditional UN inspections, Mr. Hussein has changed the political geography. The Arab League, which ha been slowly coming around to the American position, is now saying Saddam should be given time to demonstrate his good faith. Ditto for the Russians, an important vote on the Security Council. If Saddam says he’s ready to begin complying with past UN resolutions, getting new ones passed will be more difficult.
This could be a good thing. If the world situation is not a game, if we are sincere in our statements about wanting to see a reduction in weapons of mass destruction, then this week’s events could be good news. This week’s news might mean consultation and coalition building work. It might mean armed confrontation is not our only means of resolving disputes. If this is all not a game, if this is for real, this week’s events might mean containment and negotiation can work, if given the chance.
But what if it’s all just a game? Saddam isn’t stupid; he follows the American press, too. He’s playing the same game as Bush and Cheney and it’s not just Mideast politics, it’s American politics. Mideast tensions and American elections have been bedfellows since Ronald Reagan worried about an “October Surprise” coming out of Teheran in 1980. The White House plays along, sending out spokespeople to jeer at Saddam, calling his offer just another disingenuous ploy.
Problem is, there’s plenty of disingenuity to go around. In this game, Saddam’s offer means the Bush momentum toward war slows. Bad news about the economy might start to creep back onto the front pages before November fifth. If George Bush wants to stay in the game, he’s got to raise the stakes. The day Saddam agreed to inspections, the White House moved the goal line, saying the Iraq situation is about disarmament, not inspections.
The difference between peace and war should not be a game, but that’s the way it appears. The stakes look like human lives.