honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser
Posted on: Sunday, February 9, 2003

FOCUS
Saddam dreams of Kim Jong Il's weapons

 •  Invasion may end treaties on arms
 •  Regime change does not justify war

By Tom Macdonald

"The only hope for honest man is to think all possible evil of evil men." — Edmund Burke

As an American invasion of Iraq grows more and more likely, the nation must prepare itself for the polarization of its people over the justification of such a war, as was the case during the Vietnam War.

Advertiser library photo • Oct. 11, 2001

Today we are seeing a huge divergence in U.S. public opinion on whether to invade Iraq and try to stop Saddam Hussein from possibly using or exporting nuclear, chemical or biological weapons that could slaughter thousands or millions of innocent people.

The key question raised by those opposing an invasion is: Why can't the United States wait until such time as Saddam unquestionably presents a clear and present danger to our national security before taking military action against him?

I think the current crisis with North Korea provides the answer to this question. North Korea is now a clear and present danger, both through its nuclear weapons and the thousands of rockets and artillery pieces it has aimed at Seoul, South Korea.

North Korea's "Dear Leader," Kim Jong Il, a megalomaniac like Saddam, threatens to incinerate Seoul if the United States or the United Nations takes any action to eliminate its nuclear weapons. North Korea threatens war if the U.N. even imposes economic sanctions against it.

And the United States, the world superpower, is unable to respond to this threat because North Korea already has these weapons and is led by a dictator who appears crazy enough to use them.

In response to their nuclear blackmail, we are reduced to offering them economic aid if they will cease and desist. It is too late for us to act against them effectively.

Imagine the scenario if Saddam were in the same position: This time these weapons would be in the hands of a butcher who has been humiliated time and again over some 12 years by the United States. We destroyed his army. We have taken control of half of his airspace. We send U.N. inspectors into his personal palaces. We are training an army of Iraqis to overthrow him.

The man has to be seething with anti-U.S. rage.

He would not hesitate for a second to share nuclear or other terrible weapons with terrorist groups who share his rage against the U.S. infidels. Or to hold the entire Middle East hostage to his dreams of leading an Arab supernation. And, as with North Korea, once he has the weapons, it will be too late to stop him.

Saddam Hussein could conceivably hold the entire Middle East hostage to his dreams of leading an Arab supernation.

Associated Press

For some time, it has puzzled me why so many of my fellow citizens don't reach the same conclusion as I do on this issue. And I have concluded that Americans, as a people, are just too good.

We have been raised to believe that there are no truly evil people in the world. That criminals aren't evil — they've been victims of a poor environment, and we can rehabilitate them.

And we extend this pattern of thought from the individual level to the universal level. We think that any international problem or crisis can be solved by negotiation, and that solutions will be reached by mutual compromise.

After Hitler, after Stalin, after 9/11, one might expect that Americans would become more realistic about evil in the world around us.

But we haven't.

Our problem as Americans is that nearly half of us are incapable of "thinking all possible evil of evil men." And so we favor more talk, more negotiations, more inspections. Perhaps we just cannot face the disturbing reality that there truly are evil people out there.

But there are. People like the mafiosi so amiably depicted on "The Sopranos." People who use force to reach their goals. People who only respond to force, not words. People who think those who shrink from using force are weak and contemptible and have no qualms about destroying them.

In an essay now 15 years old, Thomas Sowell talks about the "Mindset of Munich," in which European leaders, most notably British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, failed to stand up to Hitler's demand for a chunk of Czechoslovakia.

With the purest of motives — to avoid war — these leaders failed to respond with force to Hitler's demands. They "negotiated" and traded a little "land for peace."

Hitler, seeing that the civilized world would not fight for right, was emboldened and came perilously close to ruling the Western world.

People like me see a frightful parallel with the Iraq crisis.

If North Korea and Saddam show the United Nations and the United States to be paper tigers, as they are perilously close to doing, other rogue regimes will follow their lead.

And the world will become a truly terrifying jungle where might makes right. Osama bin Laden and North Korea are just previews of what to expect.

Tom Macdonald is the retired president of the Hawaiian Trust Co. He was an infantry officer in Vietnam.