Saddam Hussein is a brutal tyrant and a ruthless dictator. He must go. Iraq would be a much better place without him and so would the rest of the world. Okay? Clear? Now that we have that particular argument out of the way, it is time to have a closer look at some basic and very important points.
To simplify the argument — to say that Saddam is the only political leader who ought to be removed from power — is basically unacceptable. America’s foreign policy has rarely been regarded as fair, consistent or predictable. That point is now clearer than ever before. The decision to go to war against Iraq has been a subject of great debate among both America’s friends and foes. The decision has also confused and puzzled many Americans themselves. In general, the motives, the timing and the objectivity of America’s policy in its war on terrorism, and toward Iraq in particular, are all in question and there have been not nearly enough convincing answers provided. The global and moral responsibility of the sole superpower — America — requires that it act with an even-hand against all tyrants and rogue rulers around the world.
Mad men such as Ariel Sharon and Kim Jong Il would also be removed from their jobs if the same logic used against Saddam were applied to them. These two butchers have done more harm to their land, their people and their neighbors than is permissible. They have been a source of great terror and they still contribute enormously to the political instability and chaos in their particular regions. To continue institutionalizing double standards by dealing with a tyrant such as Saddam in one manner and getting the whole world to join in this “good” war is one thing — but to greet Sharon in the Oval Office seven times and praise “his humane policies” toward the Palestinians and call him “a man of peace” is nothing short of a tragic, uninformed and illogical farce. The road to redemption should not only pass through Baghdad, it should also pass through Pyongyang and most definitely, it must pass through Tel Aviv. Until there is a moral and just foreign policy based on consistent morality, America must expect to stand alone, abandoned by friends and foes alike.
I hope there is a wise voice somewhere in the “war” councils being held today in the inner sanctums of the American administration. These wise voices will point out that the continuation of America’s current foreign policy on the basis of inequality and inconsistency may well result in a catastrophe of unimaginable proportions. Such a price is simply too high for anyone — or any nation — with a sense of decency and fair play to pay.
