U.S.
Legislators Warn Bush Against Hasty Strike on Iraq
 |
|
Feinstein
of California introduced a resolution opposing the use of force
against Iraq without congressional authorization or a
declaration of war
|
WASHINGTON,
July 31 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Top Republican and
Democrat lawmakers, as well as regional experts, cautioned U.S.
President George W. Bush Wednesday, July 31, against hastily and
unilaterally launching a war to remove Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
"We
need to weigh the risks of action versus the risks of inaction,"
said Senator Joseph Biden (D-DE), chairman of the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee, at the start of two days of hearings on assessing
the Iraqi threat.
"We
must estimate, soberly, the human and economic cost of war plans and
post-war plans," agreed Republican Senator Dick Lugar of the same
panel. "This is a time for all of us to think through the cost
and the dangers."
Sen.
Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, ranking Republican on the committee, on
Wednesday said on NBC's "Today" show, "It is now time
for a national discussion on this.”
"This
is a serious, serious issue because there will be consequences here,
there will be unintended consequences. We need to answer some
questions."
Bush
has stated his determination to remove Saddam Hussein from power,
insisting that the Iraqi president's pursuit of weapons of mass
destruction poses a threat to the United States and its allies.
Although
the administration has made efforts to link Iraq to the September 11
terrorist attacks on the U.S., it has offered no evidence on the
matter, even though officials have said Saddam has links to terrorists
and could share his weapons with them.
USA
Today reports that Bush administration officials have told key
lawmakers not to expect a U.S. attack on Iraq before the fall
elections, saying there would be no ''October surprise,'' allowing
time for Congress to debate the possibility of war.
 |
|
Biden
believes there would be no attack against Iraq this year
|
Biden
added, "There's not likely to be anything before November, and I
think they're trying to get their act together on what to do
afterwards."
And
though Bush has often spoken of the need to remove Saddam from power,
administration officials have not said an invasion is inevitable,
reports news agencies.
U.S.
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday, "We don't know
if the United States would exercise a military option with respect to
Iraq…There are a variety of ways to address it: diplomatically,
economic and military."
And
Biden, doubting there would be an invasion this year, has stated that
he believes Bush has not made a final decision on the matter.
"I'm
convinced the administration has not made up their mind yet,"
said Biden. "Now they may have made up their mind about a regime
change, but I'd be very, very, very surprised if the president has
made a decision on how to attempt to change that regime."
Lawmakers
have insisted that Bush consult with Congress and clearly outline his
military plan before pursuing his objective and warned that the
president had to persuade U.S. allies, particularly those in the
region, to back the initiative.
Democratic
Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Patrick Leahy of Vermont on
Tuesday introduced a resolution that opposed the use of force against
Iraq without congressional authorization or a declaration of war,
reports news agencies.
"This
is not a question ... whether or not Saddam Hussein is a brutal
dictator - he most certainly is," Feinstein said. "The
question is what [is] the best policy for the United States to address
these issues and, if we are to use force, that we do so only after
full debate and consideration of the options and with a united
government and the specific statutory authorization of Congress."
Speaking
to the committee, defense and military expert Anthony Cordesman warned
the U.S. administration not to underestimate Iraqi military forces.
"It
is very dangerous to make quick, sweeping generalization of the
military capability of Iraq," he said. "This is not a force
that can be dismissed."
Effective
U.S. military action against Iraq, he said, would require a force of
at least 50,000 to 80,000, as well as access to major air bases in the
region, particularly in Turkey and Saudi Arabia. If the latter were
not available, all the air bases in Kuwait, Qatar and Bahrain would
have to be open to U.S. forces.
"If
you cannot get Saudi airspace, that would be critical," Cordesman
said, adding that, "any assessment of [U.S.] relative capability
is based and determined not so much on what our European allies will
do, but on our support in the region."
Saudi
Arabia has stated its opposition to any effort to topple Hussein,
stressing that the nature of the ruling regime in Baghdad was an
internal Iraqi affair.
Biden
has also emphasized the importance of considering what U.S.
responsibilities would be in the region if Washington toppled Hussein.
"In
many ways the most critical question related to our responsibilities
to the day after," he said. "In Afghanistan, the war was
prosecuted exceptionally well, but the follow-through commitment to
Afghanistan's security and reconstruction has, in my judgment, fallen
short."
The
former head of the United Nations arms inspection team in Iraq
(UNSCOM), Richard Butler defended the current policy of containment
against the Iraqi regime, but said the only way it would be more
successful would be if Russia agreed to cooperate with the United
States.
"If
you can get Russia [and France] to work seriously with us in Baghdad
to make very clear to the Iraqis that this is it, you do some serious
arms control or you are toast, then we might have a chance," he
said.
Russia
has called for a peaceful settlement of the crisis over U.N. weapons
inspections in Iraq and urged Baghdad to abide by U.N. resolutions to
settle the issue.
Butler
warned, however, that containment had failed to stop Hussein from
working hard on developing and increasing alleged weapons of mass
destruction capability.
But
he added that it was not likely that he would provide those same
weapons to non-Iraqi terrorist groups.
"I
suspect that, especially given his psychology and aspirations, Saddam
would be reluctant to share what he believes to be an indelible source
of his own power," Butler said.
|
