Colin Powell's mistake (or how many more people will pay with their life for this ??? why is he not in the DOG HOUSE?)
By Ze'ev Schiff
A second war in 12 years against the same country is an unusual event in American history. Despite the resounding defeat Saddam Hussein suffered in 1991, the United States felt the need to go back and use its power against Iraq - this time under terrible political and international circumstances. That's what enabled Saddam Hussein to recently say, with justification, that in 1991, he was beaten in battle but not in war. The goals of the second war have been expanded to a certain extent, because the first war did not end properly.
On the eve of the second war, it is important to reexamine the mistake made then. Two members of the American team involved in deciding to end the war in 1991 are playing a key role in Washington today: U.S. Vice President Richard Cheney, then defense secretary, and Secretary of State Colin Powell, then chief of staff. I recently spoke with one of their aides who was present at the last two meetings during which time the decision to end the war was made.
The first meeting, which took place between Cheney and Powell, was intended to prepare the proposal given to then-president George Bush. Powell, who essentially controlled the conversation, proposed an immediate end to the war once Kuwait was liberated from Iraqi occupation. Cheney wasn't satisfied with that, and asked Powell to offer alternatives to show the president. Although he asked Powell a number of times, those present noticed that the secretary of state did not respond, but only reiterated his sole proposal - to immediately end the attack. The two then went to Bush, and the final decision was made, against the recommendations of the field commander, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, who was on the ground.
On the ground, the Iraqi army was in a terrible state. Some of the Republican Guard divisions were trapped in Basra, between the rivers. It was easy to corral them in the pocket and then bomb them from the air. There was no need for a sweeping invasion of Iraq or for reaching Baghdad. A powerful air attack would have been enough, and two or three days of a massive air assault on Iraqi forces would have led to a genuine victory, since the Republican Guards were always Saddam's main power base. But Gen. Powell rejected that opportunity. Now those divisions comprise the main force that Saddam Hussein has concentrated near Baghdad to conduct the major battle against the Americans. Fate ironically is punishing Powell for his mistake - what he didn't want to do in 1991 he'll have to agree to do now, at a much higher price.
Making the removal of a leader the goal of a war is very rare, but getting rid of Saddam Hussein will make it possible to eradicate the weapons of mass destruction in his country. In the Kosovo and Serbian wars, the removal of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic was added to earlier goals, and eventually he was brought before a special international war crimes tribunal. Then, too, the move was preceded by heavy NATO bombing in a war that the UN Security Council also did not authorize. But all of Europe participated, including France, because it took place at home.
It is highly doubtful that Saddam Hussein will take advantage of the opportunity to save his country great destruction and suffering and agree to leave Iraq, as demanded by Bush. Many Arab countries back the ultimatum, but just a few days ago, Saddam Hussein rejected the same offer proposed by the last envoy to see him. The envoy who made the offer was an odd choice - former Lebanese president Amin Gemayel, who has had previous contacts with Saddam Hussein. The first time he arrived in Baghdad, Saddam Hussein did not receive him. The second time around, earlier this week, Saddam rejected the proposal. And this was followed by Bush's public ultimatum on Monday night. |
