Today around 200,000 people marched in Florence, Italy, protesting the the build-up for a possible war with Iraq. Most of the attendents belong to the wide umbrella of leftist groups that are referred to as 'anti-globalists' or 'anti-capitalists.'
Europe is generally opposed to an American unilateral war on Iraq, but is more divided on tough arms inspections. While Anti-Americanism (in the narrow sense of being opposed to American politics, not necessarily people and culture) is rampant and explains some of this opposition, it is clear that George W. Bush's rhetoric has not been helpful.
Shortly after 9/11, when world sympathy with the US was on its top, Bush started eroding the new-found good-will. First, his statement that those not for him were against him. Then, the silly 'crusade' gaffe. Thirdly, the infamous 'axis of evil' rhetioric. Finally, the fact that Bush has pushed hard to disarm Iraq, or, rather bring about 'regime change,' which he only recently has half-backed down from.
However, if we put aside the unproven assertions that US aggression towards Iraq is really about oil, or Israel, or both, I will claim that Bush's policies have made perfect sense. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that what the Bush administration want to accomplish is simply to make sure Iraq does not obtain weapons of mass distruction (WMD) or long-range missiles.
In 1998, Unmovic (the UN arms inspectors) were finally withdrawn. The Iraqis were basically refusing to comply with the Security Council resolutions about disarmament. At that time, there was no political will in the west to force the issue.
Iraq is already under heavy sanctions. Nothing, except credible threat of military force could possibly convince Saddam Hussein to let the UN back in. Bush has made it very credible that he is willing to go to war. Indeed, so credible that even his allies assume that a war is what he desperately wants and needs. It will have appeared to Saddam that the only way to avoid war is 100% compliance.
At one time, it looked like war was unavoidable, and that Bush would attack no matter what. Then, on Sept 12, Bush delivered a brilliant speech to the UN General Assembly that turned the opinion of many from one of resentment towards Bush's tough talk to understanding. UN nations grabbed the lifeline Bush handed to them to avoid war: get arms inspectors into Iraq again. Perhaps surprisingly, Iraq conceded.
After some serious negotiations between the powers in the Security Council, we now have a mandate for arms inspections. There is a genuine possibility to avoid war, if, ond only if, Iraq allows its WMD programmes to be dismantled.
Those who oppose Bush's politics are really arguing that we should allow Saddam Hussein to work to obtain WMD, and continue his human rights abuses indefinately. That is, perhaps, a rational position. But those who desire the return of the UN arms inspectors to Iraq cannot possibly believe this could be accomplished any other way. What the Bush administration has done, so far, as opposed to some of the rhetoric, deserves credit.
