From the WSJ Opinion Archives
THE WESTERN FRONT
The Crawl to War
What are you waiting for, Mr. President?
Germany, France and the 10 million protesters who turned out en masse this weekend are not the only ones taking affirmative steps to delay the inevitable battle to topple Saddam Hussein. Now that the U.S. is apparently backing an 18th U.N. resolution that would set up a series of tests for the Iraqi dictator, it should be clear that George W. Bush is also slow to this fight.
For months President Bush has repeated the refrain that his mind is not made up on whether to invade. Most people simply assumed the president had already decided on war. But perhaps the world should pay more heed to the president's words. Mr. Bush already has a sizable coalition and international law on his side. At some point one must recognize the possibility that the White House is delaying by design.
After all, it's been five months since President Bush forced the Iraq issue on the United Nations, demanding that the U.N. take immediate action or become "irrelevant." In the meantime some substantive things have happened. Congress authorized force, and so did the U.N. in Resolution 1441. But mostly we've seen diplomatic card shuffling. Inspectors toured Iraq, weasels complained about the absence of a "smoking gun," and the world waited.
Mr. Bush, of course, has never stopped putting pressure on Iraq. The State of the Union address was yet another call to action. Soon after that speech eight European nations signed a letter declaring their support--a slap at the French and Germans. Within days 10 more European nations declared their support. Still America held its fire.
Many thought the pivotal moment in a shift to war would come with Hans Blix's first report to the United Nations, last month. Mr. Blix delivered hard-hitting testimony proving Saddam was in material breach of Resolution 1441.
The president responded not by invading but by sending Colin Powell to the U.N. with a panoply of props--charts, diagrams, satellite photographs and a vial of what looked like anthrax--further proving Iraq's defiance. Mr. Powell also revealed evidence connecting Saddam to al Qaeda.
Then, nothing. Mr. Blix, emboldened by another last chance to save Saddam, headed to Baghdad. He reported back to the United Nations on Friday, bashing Mr. Powell by trying to poke holes in the secretary's fact-laden presentation. Meanwhile, Saddam continued his game of cooperating on procedure, but not in substance. He now promises to allow U2 reconnaissance flights and for scientists to be interviewed inside Iraq.
Still, President Bush says war can be avoided if Saddam complies with the 17 U.N. resolutions. And, of course, the nation and the world wait.
Civilians and civil authorities are also holding their breath. This isn't fair to coalition partners that border Iraq, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said on "Meet the Press" Sunday, so the president will make a decision in weeks, not months. Meanwhile the long-suffering Iraqi people ponder their fate. Will Mr. Bush really come to their rescue this time? His father urged Iraqis to rise up against Saddam 12 years ago, only to abandon them when they heeded his call.
In more civilized regions, the delays have emboldened the weasels. The French supported Resolution 1441, but in the months since have been working, along with Germany's anti-American government, to undermine President Bush. This came to a head when Germany and France (and their junior partner, Belgium) blocked NATO planning sessions aimed at coordinating efforts to protect Turkey from a possible Iraqi attack.
The axis of weasels hoped that the move would forestall the liberation of Iraq or, perhaps, at least knock Turkey out of the coalition of the willing. But the weasels failed. The U.S. and other NATO members insisted that the alliance meet its obligations. Germany and Belgium gave in when the question came before the alliance's Defense Planning Committee, on which the French, who left NATO's military command in 1965, hold no seat.
The delays have also seriously damaged the U.N. It is now clearly irrelevant. The Security Council would not be confronting Saddam had President Bush not confronted the Security Council. If the U.N. inaction stays in the spotlight much longer, the debate will turn to whether the U.S. should remain in such a feckless body. Australia's Prime Minister John Howard is already openly saying that his nation's security is more closely linked to the U.S. than the U.N.
Afghanistan was a good lesson in how better to employ these tactics. The military learned it needed better communication between ground troops and pilots, so when soldiers go into Iraq, they'll be carrying new $20,000 computers developed since Afghanistan's liberation.
Diplomatically, waiting forced the U.N. to show its hand. Anyone open to the facts can now see that the U.N. is unable to enforce its own resolutions and that Iraq has no intention of giving up its weapons of mass destruction or the sinister intentions of its ruler. Waiting also helped drum up as much world support as possible. The U.S. now has all the support it is likely going to get.
But if President Bush accepts the French preferred schedule of waiting for Mr. Blix to report back to the U.N. on March 14, he will have frittered away the cool winter months and risks sending America's troops to fight in the perilous desert heat.
When will the waiting game be over, Mr. President?
Mr. Miniter is assistant editor of OpinionJournal.com. His column appears Tuesdays.
