U.S. diplomats who quit to protest Iraq war warn that America isn't any safer
Tuesday, May 27 @ 10:06:05 EDT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The three say they don't regret resigning and doubt U.S. any safer than before Saddam's ouster.
By Malcolm Foster, The Associated Press
NEW YORK - The three U.S. diplomats who resigned to protest the Iraq war say they're glad it ended fairly quickly but still think the war was unjustified - and doubt toppling Saddam Hussein has made Americans any safer from terrorist attacks.
While there's no clear indication the recent suicide attacks in Saudi Arabia and Morocco were retaliation for the war, the ex-diplomats worry that the occupation of Iraq could spur similar assaults on U.S. targets - particularly if order isn't restored soon.
"The longer we stay, and the more that people say the new Iraqi government is a lackey of the U.S., the more dangerous it is for Americans," said Mary Ann Wright, 57, the former deputy chief of mission at U.S. embassies in Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Mongolia.
Wright, also a former Army colonel, quit March 19, after resignations by John Brady Kiesling, the former political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Athens, and John Brown, who spent most of his 22 years with the Foreign Service in Europe and Russia.
In resignation letters to Secretary of State Colin Powell, all three said they found the Bush administration's case for war unconvincing and its approach toward other countries condescending.
The war, they said, would hurt U.S. interests, and they haven't changed their views.
"I'm convinced that we've increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks," said Kiesling, 45, who asked in his letter to Powell if the administration had adopted as its motto a phrase by Roman Emperor Caligula: "Let them hate as long as they fear."
President George W. Bush has said that by toppling Saddam, the coalition has removed an al-Qaida ally and cut off a source of funding and weapons for terrorists.
And American officials have stressed that the coalition will withdraw from Iraq after a government that represents the Iraqi people is set up, but they have refused to put a timetable on the occupation.
Brown says he still views the Iraq war as a diversion from the war on terrorism.
"I'm glad there weren't more casualties, but I'm still not sure where the war fits in with our national priorities," said Brown.
In keeping with its normal policy on personnel matters, the State Department had no comment on the resignations.
Danielle Pletka, a Middle East expert at the American Enterprise Institute, disagreed sharply with the diplomats' criticisms, arguing that their opposition to the war implied it was acceptable to leave Saddam in power.
"That's reprehensible from a foreign-policy standpoint and a moral standpoint," Pletka said. Saddam's removal "will not only make Americans safer, it'll make Iraqis safer."
Brown, Kiesling and Wright said they're not apologists for Saddam, whom they described as a brutal dictator.
They believe the invasion was unjustified because they doubt Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States. Using pre-emptive military force to topple Saddam's regime will hurt American interests over the long haul - and could be used by others to justify attacks on the United States, they say.
"Going into another country for regime change opens the box wide open for other people to use that rationale for whatever they feel they need to do for their national interests," Wright said. |
