Bali Bombing Fuels Debate on Iraq War 
Bush Aides Worry That Attacks Will Erode Public
Support for Confronting Hussein 

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 17, 2002; Page A18 


Some Bush administration officials have become
concerned that the rash of attacks in Indonesia, Yemen
and Kuwait in the past week could undermine public
support for a confrontation with Iraq by reminding
Americans that the country still faces a long struggle
in the war on terrorism.

One senior administration official said that, in the
debate over the congressional resolution authorizing
military action against Iraq, Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.)
made a forceful argument that a war against Iraq now
would not only undermine the war against terrorism but
possibly expand it.

"The odds of another strike against the people of the
United States by al Qaeda or another international
terrorist group goes up when we attack Baghdad,"
Graham said during the floor debate last week, before
terrorists killed more than 180 people at a Balinese
nightspot.

"In the past few days, after Bali, people around here
have thought the argument that Senator Graham made
will have some resonance with the public," the
official said. 

Another administration official said the Bali attacks
had reopened a debate in some quarters of the
government about whether a war with Iraq would
distract and weaken the campaign against terrorism.
But he said that proponents of a confrontation with
Iraq were just as adamant that the attacks made the
case for action against Hussein, since they suspect he
is closely linked with terrorist groups.

Since the Bali attack, President Bush and other top
aides have tried to address those concerns by
stressing their belief that Iraqi President Saddam
Hussein's possible possession of weapons of mass
destruction is linked to the broader battle against
terrorism. Earlier this week, Bush said "both are
equally important." He asserted that "we need to think
about Saddam Hussein using al Qaeda to do his dirty
work."

Yesterday, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz
also linked the two struggles. "Disarming Saddam
Hussein and the war on terrorism are not merely
related, they are one and the same," he said. "And if
we can defeat a terrorist regime in Iraq, it will be a
defeat for terrorists globally."

Wolfowitz, a strong advocate of dealing with Hussein,
asserted that Hussein "supports and conspires with our
terrorist enemies. He lends them both moral and
material support."

Wolfowitz added that waiting until other problems have
been resolved is too dangerous. "There will always be
problems with acting at any time. But one thing we can
say with certainty: The danger of acting grows with
time because if military action against Saddam Hussein
becomes necessary, the greatest danger will be his
weapons of mass destruction," he said.

One senior administration official said that if the
United States were to back off Iraq because of Bali,
"it would look like a weakness of will on our part. It
would suggest that terrorism works."

In fact, the official added, the effect of the bombing
is to reinvigorate the campaign against terrorism by
both the Indonesians and the Australians. He said that
he didn't think it would lessen the demand for action
against Iraq by Americans. "The public has a lot more
common sense than that."

But Kenneth Pollack, an Iraq expert at the Brookings
Institution who served in the Clinton administration,
said he believes the Bali attack undermines the
administration's case for a war against Iraq at this
time. "Bali shows that al Qaeda is still out there. It
has teeth. It can bite hard."

Pollack added that the administration might gain some
support for a war if the Bali attack convinces
Americans that there are "still nasty threats in the
world" that must be addressed.

Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign and
defense policy at the American Enterprise Institute,
said people who were using the Bali attacks to halt a
war against Iraq are engaged in a "a pathetic
rearguard action" to prevent military action. "There
are plenty of people in Washington who don't want to
do things," she said. "Sorry, buddies, you've lost."

Pletka said "an incident in Bali, I hate to say it,
will not have much resonance with the American
public," compared with a major attack against a U.S.
target.

To date, the administration has provided little proof
of any links between Hussein and al Qaeda. Chas
Freeman, the U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during
the Persian Gulf War in 1991, said that the idea that
a secular leader such as Hussein would link up with
"religious diehards" who despise his government is "a
very strange notion indeed."

But Freeman said the administration's assertions might
become a self-fulfilling prophecy if the United States
does launch an attack. In that case, he said, Hussein
might "make an alliance with the devil" and promote
terrorist attacks if he had nothing to lose.

Pollack said that since the administration has not
provided evidence of links between Hussein and al
Qaeda, "the rhetoric doesn't buy them much." But a
recent poll by the Pew Research Center found that 66
percent of Americans surveyed believed that "Saddam
Hussein helped the terrorists in the September 11
attacks."

"If the president wants us to take action on Iraq and
conduct a war on terrorism, we can do that," one
official said.


© 2002 The Washington Post Company


=====
Koran-Salatiga (KORSAL) Info: groups.yahoo.com/group/koran-salatiga

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
Leninist-International mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To change your options or unsubscribe go to:
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/leninist-international

Reply via email to