From the WSJ Opinion Archives

by JAMES TARANTO
Wednesday, September 18, 2002 3:05 P.M. EDT

Don't Panic. Peace Isn't at Hand.
The story line today is that Saddam Hussein's offer to allow U.N. weapons inspectors into Iraq has "split" the U.N. Security Council. "Iraq's offer once again highlighted the fault lines between Russia and France on one side and the US and UK on the other," reports the Financial Times.

None of this matters. President Bush made clear in his speech last week that if the U.N. doesn't go along with his plans for Iraq, America will act anyway--as Bill Clinton did in Kosovo when the Security Council balked. As long as Bush wasn't bluffing last week--and does anyone think he was?--there will be "regime change" in Baghdad. And while the Russians and French will play both sides in the run-up to a Security Council vote, it's likely they'll eventually join the winning side, and the U.S. will act with U.N. approval.

The vote that really matters is the one in Congress, and the Associated Press reports Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle has assured the president that a resolution will come to a vote "well before the election." As late as last week, Daschle had been urging that Congress wait until after Election Day for fear of "politicizing" the issue. It may be that Saddam did Bush a big favor with his inspection ploy. With the Iraqi dictator obviously maneuvering to delay a decision, it wouldn't look good if the South Dakota senator were doing the same thing.

The White House Web site, incidentally, has a handy enumeration of incidents in which Iraq has violated Security Council resolutions.

You Don't Say--I
"Iraqis Expert at Hiding Weapons"--headline, MSNBC.com, Sept. 17

Between Iraq and Gerhard Place
Will Gerhard Schroeder's aggressively dovish approach to Iraq pay off at the polls Sunday? Maybe not. The latest poll shows that the Christian Democratic Party of challenger Edmund Stoiber has inched back ahead of Schroeder's Social Democrats, 37.3% to 37%, the Times of London reports. That's obviously too close to call, and in any case the composition of the new German government will depend on who can form a coalition with smaller parties.

Stoiber says of Schroeder: "He has been trying to make this election into a choice between war and peace. But I hope that people today can see how Schroeder has isolated us from the United Nations and, indeed, from the world. Schröder has contributed nothing to this solution. I think voters will now see through him."

If Schroeder wins, he will face quite a dilemma: Does he break his emphatic campaign promise, or does he defy the U.N. and alienate the U.S.? The Germans have a word for what we'll feel if Schroeder does end up in such a predicament. The call it Schadenfreude.

The Times Does Headstands
Thomas Friedman's column in today's New York Times starts off silly--he declares, on the basis of people who've called in to radio shows on which he was a guest, that Americans don't support war against Saddam Hussein--but then he makes a good point, one we've made before:

Most strategists insist that the reason we must go into Iraq--and the only reason--is to get rid of its weapons of mass destruction, not regime change and democracy building. I disagree.

I think the chances of Saddam being willing, or able, to use a weapon of mass destruction against us are being exaggerated. What terrifies me is the prospect of another 9/11--in my mall, in my airport or in my downtown--triggered by angry young Muslims, motivated by some pseudo-religious radicalism cooked up in a mosque in Saudi Arabia, Egypt or Pakistan. And I believe that the only way to begin defusing that threat is by changing the context in which these young men grow up--namely all the Arab-Muslim states that are failing at modernity and have become an engine for producing undeterrables.

So I am for invading Iraq only if we think that doing so can bring about regime change and democratization. Because what the Arab world desperately needs is a model that works--a progressive Arab regime that by its sheer existence would create pressure and inspiration for gradual democratization and modernization around the region.

The title of Friedman's column is "Iraq, Upside Down." That would have been a better title for today's lead Times editorial, which appears opposite Friedman and takes exactly the position he criticizes:

The cat-and-mouse game with Iraq has begun--again. With his ambiguous promise to welcome back weapons inspectors, Saddam Hussein has stirred new uncertainty at the United Nations about the proper course of action. That makes it all the more important to clarify what really counts in this conflict. The answer is the destruction of Iraq's unconventional weapons and the dismantling of its program to develop nuclear arms. That should be the lodestar of American and United Nations policy.

The Times acknowledges that "it seems unlikely that Mr. Hussein will voluntarily bow to U.N. disarmament demands," but it does hold out some hope that inspections will lead to "a peaceful resolution of this crisis." But a news report by the Times' Judith Miller makes clear why this is a vain hope: "Verifying Iraq's assertions that it has abandoned weapons of mass destruction, or finding evidence that it has not done so, may not be feasible, according to officials and former weapons inspectors."

Hey, Really, Thanks for the Warning
In an interview with Ha'aretz, Scott "Baghdad Jane" Ritter, who's been insisting that there's no basis on which to think Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, warns that a U.S. attack on Iraq would be "a disaster for Israel" because it might provoke Iraq to attack Israel with the weapons there's no basis on which to think Iraq has.

Virgins' Vacation Ends
The first suicide bombing in six weeks killed an Israeli cop outside the Arab town of Umm el Fahm, the Jerusalem Post reports. "According to Channel 2, the bomber detonated his explosives while standing on the highway, after police approached him because he was suspiciously weaving between trucks on foot," the Post says. Arutz Sheva reports that he "was targeting a passenger bus traveling towards Afula."

War Is Peace
"Israel Rejects Palestinian Peace Plan" is the headline the New York Times' Web site put on an Associated Press dispatch from the Israeli capital. The dispatch explains the terms of this proposed "peace plan":

The Palestinian Authority "will be ready to encourage all Palestinians to stop targeting Israeli civilians," [Palestinian planning minister Nabil Shaath] said, adding that he also sought an Israeli promise to stop killing suspected Palestinian militants and destroying houses.

It's not entirely clear what Shaath means by "Israeli civilians," but the category obviously excludes soldiers in uniform. The Palestinian Arab view is also that civilians, including children, living in the "occupied" territories are all combatants. Sometimes the category of "Israeli civilians" is so narrow as to exclude nearly all Israeli Jews, since Israel has near-universal conscription.

So what Shaath is offering, at best, would entail an end to some terrorism, though it would legitimate terror against civilians in the West Bank and Gaza, as well as guerrilla attacks against uniformed Israeli soldiers. And he promises only to "encourage" that other terrorism stop. This, the New York Times calls a "peace plan."

Red Dress of Arab Grievances
You really have to see the photo at the above link, but here's the caption: "Lebanese model Nathaly Fadlallah models the 'Dress of Revolution,' designed by Saudi haute couture designer Yehya al-Bashri. The dress was part of a collection featured at an Arab fashion festival in Beirut on September 17, 2002 to demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian uprising against Israel."

The dress is covered with faux bloodstains from the waist to the knees, and below the knees it shows an Israeli tank against a background of burning buildings. Reuters, by the way, classifies this as an "entertainment" photo.

You Don't Say--II
"Oil Supplies Key to World Economy"--headline, USA Today op-ed piece, Sept. 18

SOCOM Won't Let the Terrorists Be So Calm
"The Pentagon is preparing to consolidate control of most of the global war on terrorism under the U.S. Special Operations Command, according to government sources, signaling an intensified but more covert approach to the next phase in the battle against al Qaeda and other international terrorist groups," the Washington Post reports. Special-ops troops are fighting on a variety of fronts against dispersed al Qaeda terrorists:

Special Operations units have been active in Pakistan for months and are training military forces in Yemen and Georgia. The presence of those training missions could provide a cover for conducting any covert raids and other actions against suspected al Qaeda members in the two countries.

The United States has also placed more than 500 Special Operations troops in the African nation of Djibouti, where they are near potential hot spots such as Yemen and Somalia, government officials said. Also, the USS Belleau Wood, an amphibious assault ship that carries attack helicopters and a handful of Harrier jump jets, has been stationed off the Horn of Africa for about six weeks, ready to carry those troops and some specialized helicopters.

This means Gen. Tommy Franks, chief of the U.S. Central Command, can shift his focus to Iraq. "Quite frankly, I think Franks is tickled to have this off his plate," one source tells the Post.

Target: Megawati
The Australian newspaper reports that a Kuwaiti al Qaeda man captured in Indonesia in June has confessed he was involved with two plots to assassinate Indonesia's President Megawati Sukarnoputri. The would-be assassins were not the sharpest knives in the drawer, however; one of the plots "collapsed when a Malaysian man earmarked for the job blew off his leg with a bomb."

This Just In
"On Sept. 11, 2001, four hijacked planes crashed into the World Trade Center in New York, the Pentagon outside Washington and a Pennsylvania field, killing more than 3,000 people. The United States blames bin Laden and his al Qaeda network."--Reuters, Sept. 17, 2002

Stupidity Watch
Brian Sewell of the London Evening Standard is unhappy that people are making such a big deal about the Sept. 11 attacks:

Shall we spend it again in September 2003 and four and five? Shall we make 11 September an annual orgasm of remembered grief ? Or should we, having held, in the absence of so many solitary funerals, one obsequy for all, lay the memory to rest? . . .

But 2,801 men and women died in the twin towers, not one of them an enemy of Islam. Two thousand eight hundred and one? What sort of number is that over which to make a fuss? How many more, in recent years, have died in Nicaragua and Rwanda, the Congo and Biafra, Bosnia, Kosovo and Croatia, all now virtually forgotten?

Sewell goes on to bash America:

The United States of America has a short history of extreme violence against the indigenous peoples of the central belt of North America, of ethnic cleansing and now of ethnic ghettos, of territorial expansion by forced annexation and war against an infinitely weaker Mexico in 1846-8 and against Spain in 1898. . . .

What should be done with Ground Zero? As New York long since sold its soul to Mammon, it should rebuild the twin towers, resume its confident and worldly life with no pretence of piety and principle and let fade the memory of 11 September, just like the rest of its distasteful history.

Reich Three, You're Out
Clinton cabinet members seeking statewide office have racked up a record of 0-3 this season. The latest to be defeated: ex-labor secretary Robert Reich, who finished second in Massachusetts' primary for governor yesterday. The winner, state treasurer Shannon O'Brien becomes "the first female gubernatorial candidate nominated by a major party in Massachusetts," the Boston Globe reports. Erstwhile attorney general Janet Reno finally conceded yesterday in last week's Florida primary, the Associated Press reports, and of course onetime housing secretary Andrew Cuomo threw in the towel rather than face certain defeat in New York's governor's race.

Former Clinton White House aides have done better: Rahm Emanuel seems a shoo-in for an Illinois congressional seat, and Erskine Bowles faces a tough but not impossible race against Elizabeth Dole to succeed North Carolina's Sen. Jesse Helms.

Blacks vs. Jews?
"Participants in this month's Congressional Black Caucus conference say the defeat of two black House members in bitter primaries not only suggests a widening rift with Jewish Democrats, but trouble within the Democratic Party itself," Fox News reports. Ron Walters, director of the African American Leadership Institute at the University of Maryland, tells the network: "People were talking retaliation. They were saying [presidential hopeful] Sen. Joe Lieberman is dead in the water, and so on and so forth."

CBC members are upset over the defeats of Reps. Earl Hilliard of Alabama and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, both of whom had taken strong anti-Israel stands:

Walters said their defeats were payback from the wealthy Jewish lobby.

"When you unseat two black candidates, it's not a freak thing, it's a strategy. It took black candidates by surprise, and it's made them very angry," he said. "Why the leadership of the party didn't do anything, that's the big mystery."

What Walters doesn't mention is that Artur Davis and Denise Majette, who beat Hilliard and McKinney respectively, are also both black.

New Decade, New Demon

"Their followers are largely poor, uneducated and easy to command."--the Washington Post's Michael Weisskopf on "religious right" figures Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, Feb. 1, 1993

"They tend to be people who are insecure and vain. They are frequently nervous about their marriages and uncomfortable about parenthood. They often lack confidence in their driving skills. Above all, they are apt to be self-centered and self-absorbed, with little interest in their neighbors or communities."--the New York Times' Keith Bradsher on drivers of sport-utility vehicles, "High and Mighty," published September 2002

Zero-Tolerance Watch
Alan Newsome, a 12-year-old student at Jack Jouett Middle School in Charlottesville, Va., wore his "NRA Sports Shooting Camp" T-shirt, which "featured silhouettes of three target shooters," to school," the Charlottesville Daily Progress reports. "The school's vice principal noticed the shirt and told him to turn it inside out because the images of people shooting guns violated school policy, Alan's father, Fred Newsom, said Tuesday." Now the National Rifle Association, which takes the First Amendment as seriously as the Second, has sued the school.

You Don't Say--III
"Crime Can Take Heavy Toll on Needy"--headline, Omaha World-Herald, Sept. 17

You Don't Say--IV
"Insurance Lack Can Affect Family"--headline, Associated Press, Sept. 18

A Sick Society
Boy is AIDS ever spreading quickly in South Africa. In a BBC.com article, the delightfully named Alistair Leithead informs us that "about one in nine South Africans have the virus." That's in the third paragraph. By the sixth paragraph, Leithead is claiming that "one in five South Africans" are "now living with the virus." South Africa is lucky Leithead's article wasn't longer.

Democratic Lunacy
Glenn Reynolds notes that Democrats.com--a site, we emphasize, that has no formal affiliation with the Democratic Party--is worried about the dangers of . . . exploring the moon. A Nature article last week noted that a company called TransOrbital has won U.S. government approval for an unmanned mission "to map the surface of the Moon and photograph Earth." Eventually TransOrbital hopes "to develop communications and navigation systems for Moon exploration and tourism."

The Democrats.com guys worry: "The TransOrbital venture could be disastrous for the globe--no scientist today could predict yet how adding mass to the moon via human infrastructure or removing mass, via mining, will impact the delicate gravitational interplay between Earth and its only satellite."

As Reynolds points out: "The Moon's mass is .07 x 1024 kg. The Earth is approximately 81 times [as] massive. By contrast, TransOrbital is talking about payloads in the hundreds (102) of kilograms at most. Can these people do math?"

(Elizabeth Crowley helps compile Best of the Web Today. Thanks to Mara Gold, Damian Bennett, Natalie Cohen, Michael Segal, Raghu Desikan, David Gordon, Jacob Sasson, C.E. Dobkin, Jerome Marcus, Jonathan Kellers, S.E. Brenner, Richard Haisley, Monty Krieger, Carl Sherer, Ed Miseta, Gregory Taylor, Aaron Gross, Howard Weiser, Mike Granoff, Robert Tumminello, Robin Blanton, Michael Williamson, Chris Fehr, Mark Freiberg, T. Young, Douglas Welsh, Kevin Rys and Brian Donohue. If you have a tip, write us at opinionjournal@wsj.com, and please include the URL.)

Today on OpinionJournal:

Click to email this article EMAIL THIS Click to format this article for printing FORMAT FOR PRINTING
ARCHIVE