algebraist's Journal: My journey to support for a nearly unilateral war in Iraq

I didn't always support a nearly unilateral war in Iraq to topple the Saddam regime. In early February of 2003, I felt going after Iraq's regime was necessary but I strongly preferred the multilateral, UN route. As the final resolution approached the Security Council and before France threatened use of veto, I studied the question since the pro-war and anti-war camps were forming up. My stance is pro-war, particularly a unilateral or nearly unilateral war in contrast to my earlier belief. Five things changed my mind.

First, the UN and the Security Council made a joke of themselves between resolution 1441 and the lead-up to the implicit rejection of the UK-US resolution. I feel if that body is to be of any use, significant reforms should be made in its governance. People forget, as I did, that the UN has rarely been of use in international crises, the most recent being those in the former Yugoslavia and Africa.

Second, I listened to almost the entire UK House of Commons debate on the war question, from all sides. This convinced me that war prosecuted by the US and the UK was the only option, and it accounts for most of my conviction.

Third, I heard CNN's Larry King interview former UK PM John Major on his show and learned that, in his view, the reason why Saddam wasn't pursued in the first Persian Gulf war was because the coalition was then strongly multilateral. Indeed, Mr Major implied a unilateral approach had many advantages.

Fourth, the unqualified commitment and skill which the US Armed Services bring to the conflict to protect civilians, using intelligence, knowledge, skill, and technology wins huge respect from me. It is quite probably the single most ethical and moral war campaign ever waged. It is not surprising to me that the same decision makers who have committed themselves to this kind of war accepted the idea of embedding reporters along with units conducting it. I cannot understand how anyone who pays anything but the most casual attention to these reports can get things as wrong some media do. If the public does not understand what war involves, it seems to me the duty of news media is to educate them that loss of less than 100 lives out of hundreds of thousands in a war this intense for this time is remarkable. Some of them do achieve that education, in my opinion, but those who don't spin and select play to the most fundamental fears of their listeners rather than serving them. This kind of education has applicability beyond the immediate war, to educating public expectations regarding numbers of casualties in the aftermath of a terrorist attack with bioweapons.

Fifth, I also read and listened to the history of the Iraqi Kurds. This is a highly persecuted people who have, with the air protection of the UK and US, managed to erect a democratic government which shows great promise serving as a model for other ethnic groups in Iraq, despite their disadvantages and while being mostly Muslim. I saw a CNN interview in one Kurdish town where, after women, children, and most men left, fleeing to the mountains, one guy remained behind, explaining that he was elected alderman and it was his responsibility and duty to do that until the next election. That is what I call democratic commitment.

The Kurdish story moved my wife and I a good deal and we have made donations to the Kurdish PUK to help their people until our success in Iraq. I have also urged my Congressional representatives and President Bush to be sure Turkey does not send forces into Iraq of any kind. (Besides protecting the Kurds, what the hell do we owe Turkey? They stuck it to us during preparations for this war repeatedly and passed on $30 billion in aid.)

Finally, I am really disappointed with the rhetoric of the anti-war movement, even if I disagree with them. Their perspective and their arguments pretend nothing has happened in 30 years, being from that Noam Chomsky sort of anarchist tradition. I heard good arguments against the war in the UK House of Commons. I don't agree with them, but they were quality. This US anti-war stuff is really tired, forgetting that the world and the US has changed a lot in thirty years, completely unaware of what concerns people today.