Posted on: Friday, May 2, 2003

Case rethinking support of war as weapons hunt drags

By Derrick DePledge
Advertiser Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Hours before the first U.S. airstrikes on Baghdad, Rep. Ed Case still hoped that diplomacy could avert what appeared to be an inevitable war with Iraq.

But the freshman congressman was prepared to defend the U.S. invasion because he accepted the Bush administration's argument that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction and posed a danger to international security.

"It was not speculation. It was a statement of fact from my government," said Case, D-Hawai'i. "I decided to believe my government."

Now, he's not so sure.

Although the U.S. military is pursuing several possible leads and continues to scour the country, Iraq did not use chemical or biological weapons during the war, and no substantial evidence has surfaced showing it held such a stockpile immediately before the war.

President Bush cited weapons of mass destruction — along with Iraq's alleged support for international terrorism — as the main justification for a pre-emptive attack.

Case, the only member of Ha-wai'i's congressional delegation to consider supporting Bush on the war, said the administration's weapons-related claims were vital in forming his opinion. Without them, Case said, "I would not have seen an adequate reason to intervene."

Other Hawai'i lawmakers had doubts about the war from the start.

Last fall, Sens. Dan Inouye and Daniel Akaka and Rep. Neil Abercrombie, all Democrats, voted against giving Bush the authority to go to war if diplomacy failed. They also voiced reservations about a pre-emptive strike on Iraq in January, when it became apparent Bush was leaning toward war, and again in March, when an invasion was imminent.

Inouye said the war demonstrated the effectiveness of the U.S. military. "I think America can be proud of our armed forces," he said.

But he said the United States must now move quickly to prevent divisions between religious and ethnic factions in Iraq from escalating. "If we don't establish some sort of law and order there we may have a civil war," Inouye said.

The Bush administration, he said, should also invite other nations, even countries that may have opposed the war, to help with the financial and political responsibility of rebuilding Iraq. "We can't live on this planet by ourselves," Inouye said.

Akaka said Wednesday that he had hoped the State Department would play a broader role than the Defense Department in the aftermath of the war.

Akaka said the Bush administration put more thought into military strategy than into reconstruction. The United States, he said, should have been prepared for, not surprised by, the looting and the resurgence of Islamic fundamentalism that followed the removal of Saddam's government.

Abercrombie yesterday praised the job of U.S. troops, but he said uncertainties remain, such as a workable transition plan.

Case said the United States should withdraw from Iraq as soon as order is restored and the country has been stabilized. Any long-term United States military presence would fuel speculation in international circles that the U.S. is leading a war of occupation, not liberation, he said.