|
Diplomacy
Or War?
While
George Bush prepares to make his case for war against Iraq, Tufts
experts say diplomatic compromise may be the ultimate solution.
Medford/Somerville,
Mass. [10.07.02] -- While many foreign policy experts believe
that Iraq and its alleged chemical and nuclear weapons program
pose a threat to peace in the Middle East, few agree on the right
solution. This week, President George Bush is expected to make
his case for a U.S. invasion of Iraq, which would mark the first
preemptive military strike in American history. But Tufts experts
say a diplomatic solution -- not war -- may be the path the U.S.
ultimately takes.
"The
American public is not giving George Bush carte blanche,"
Hurst
Hannum, a foreign policy expert at Tufts'
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, told The Christian
Science Monitor.
While polls
show that Americans support weapons inspections of Iraq and the
removal of Saddam Hussein's possible nuclear capabilities, many
fear that an attack without the backing of the United Nations
could jeopardize U.S. foreign relations.
"People
know it would improve our image with the rest of the world if
Bush takes the time to work out an agreement with our international
partners," Hannum told the Monitor.
While progress
on such an agreement has been stalled for some time, as U.S. and
U.N. leaders differ on its language, there are some indications
a compromise can be forged.
"Hints
at how the stalemate might be resolved are surfacing," reported
the Monitor. "They begin with the U.S. toning down
its public insistence on 'regime change' in Iraq-a shift already
noted in Bush's most recent emphasis on 'disarming' Saddam. Beyond
that, analysts say, the Security Council powers are likely to
find the language to bridge differences."
The modified
language-which would also tone down U.S. calls for immediate military
action if Iraq breaks the agreement-should boost international
support for the U.S. position on Hussein, Hannaum told the Monitor.
"I think
they'll have to back down on wording that automatically authorizes
the use of force," Hannun told the Monitor. "That
would give the administration room to say, 'We're willing to give
peace a chance,' and thereby tremendously boost international
support for this action."
That may
also ease fears raised by leaders of regional states in the Middle
East, who worry about the impact of a U.S.-led military invasion.
"All
the states in the region do worry about Saddam," Tufts political
science professor Malik
Mufti told The Boston Herald. "They would like
regime change, but they fear what is going to happen if there
is war."
.
|