Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eashoa' M'sheekha who wrote (51397)	10/12/2002 3:34:08 AM
From: Eashoa' M'sheekha	Respond to of 281500

Zinni: Israeli retaliation to an Iraqi attack would be 'disastrous' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Janine Zacharia Oct. 11, 2002 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WASHINGTON US Middle East envoy Anthony Zinni said Thursday that Israeli involvement in any war with Iraq could have "catastrophic" consequences and that he does not think the US could persuade Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to refrain from responding to any Iraqi attack. Sharon has said that Israel reserves the right to defend itself but that a response would not necessarily be automatic. Zinni told the Middle East Institute's 56th annual conference that he does not believe the US needs to make war on Iraq now and that the US has several more pressing problems to contend with, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is a point he has made repeatedly recently. Zinni is still US special envoy to the Middle East, although he has not visited the region on official business since June; he is more busy these days trying to defuse tensions in Indonesia. After speaking Thursday morning, he met with US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs William Burns at the State Department. Zinni listed 10 conditions for a successful military campaign against Iraq. One condition, he said, was that Israel must sit it out. Asked what Israel should do if it is attacked with non-conventional weapons, Zinni said every country has a right to defend itself, but that the consequences would be grim if Israel does so. "The prime minister is going to have to make that decision of what he feels is in the best interest of his own people. There is no doubt that that will be tested," he said. "I was in Israel when the Scuds came in the last Gulf War. I doubt seriously that we're going to be able to convince the [Israeli] leadership to sit it out if that occurs again. If weapons of mass destruction are used in any way, even in a way that doesn't generate a lot of casualties, I think it will be tremendously explosive. "And the reaction will play into the hands of extremists that will want to draw out that kind of response. And it will be I think catastrophic for the entire region when it happens." Zinni said that Saddam Hussein could be contained and that war is unnecessary. "I'm not convinced we need to do this now. I am convinced we need to deal with Saddam down the road. But I think that the timing is difficult because of the conditions in the region, all the other events that are going on. I believe that he is deterrable and containable at this moment," he said. "My personal view, and it's just personal, is I think this isn't [priority] number one. It's maybe six or seven. And the affordability line needs to be drawn around five," he said. Higher priorities for the US, Zinni said, include reviving the Middle East peace process, working with Iranian reformers, supporting Afghanistan, patching up relations with Middle Eastern allies, "and fifth is to connect with the people, reconnect. We are talking past each other." Should the US go to war, Zinni said, the US needs "to approach this with global partners and international legitimacy, or whatever we do on the ground is going to be tainted from the beginning." He predicted Saudi Arabia would support a US attack if a strong case is made and a UN Security Council resolution passes. And he suggested that the Bush administration has underestimated the difficulties of creating a stable political system after a war in Iraq. He also said the war needs to be short if it is to be successful. "There's no doubt that any coalition or any forces we put in would prevail. But you know, war is never predictable... We [generals] can give you a general idea of how we feel, based on analysis, things might turn out. But in war, shit happens and it happens often." "If this war drags on, if the combat drags on, it's going to become messy," the former US Marine general said.