Annan for President, Part II
September 17, 2004
Yesterday I reported on Kofi Annan’s forthright (and refreshingly candid) comment that the war in Iraq was illegal. Here’s a question for Mr. Bush’s lawyers, who crafted the legal defense of the illegal war: You say that the United States went to war in Iraq to enforce UN resolutions that Saddam Hussein had supposedly defied. What if Iran had made the same decision, in 2003, and invaded Iraq to enforce those resolutions? Would that be okay?
Or, what if, let’s say, Russia decides to enforce Resolutions 242 and 338, calling for Israel to return to its pre-1967 borders, and invades. Would that be okay?
Members of Mr. Bush’s Coalition of the Willing are, of course, attacking Annan. In a huff is Colin Powell, who ought to be cheering Annan, but no. In an interview with the editors of The Washington Times, the Moonie rag, Powell says he will give Annan a piece of his mind :
Secretary of State Colin L. Powell yesterday expressed strong disapproval of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's description of the U.S.-led war in Iraq as illegal, saying the comment was "not a very useful statement to make at this point."
"What does it gain anyone? We should all be gathering around the idea of helping the Iraqis, not getting into these kinds of side issues," Mr. Powell said in an interview with editors and reporters at The Washington Times .
"I'm sure I will have the opportunity to talk to Kofi about this," Mr. Powell added.
With 19 more dead Americans in Iraq this week so far, and hundreds of Iraqis, it is also clear that the war in Iraq was also stupid, besides being illegal. (Either one of those flaws ought to be enough to bring down Bush, but I guess not.) Sid Blumenthal, writing in the Guardian, quotes General Odom on Iraq thusly :
Retired general William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency, told me: "Bush hasn't found the WMD. Al-Qaida, it's worse, he's lost on that front. That he's going to achieve a democracy there? That goal is lost, too. It's lost." He adds: "Right now, the course we're on, we're achieving Bin Laden's ends."
General Odom said: "This is far graver than Vietnam. There wasn't as much at stake strategically, though in both cases we mindlessly went ahead with the war that was not constructive for US aims. But now we're in a region far more volatile, and we're in much worse shape with our allies."
For a thorough summary of the pessimism on Iraq, see Jim Lobe’s latest here .
Rumsfeld, obviously tapping into the neocon happy-talk gas, suggests that things are good because Iraqis are going to get tired of being killed. This, from USA Today:
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld cast it a little differently this week, at a news conference in Missouri. Iraq is making progress, he said. “At some point the Iraqis will get tired of getting killed and we'll have enough of the Iraqi security forces that they can take over responsibility for governing that country,” he said.
Mr. Rumsfeld, let’s put it this way. Do you think Iraqis are going to get tired of winning?
tompaine.com |
