Diplomacy, preparation for war, and war are all part of the same spectrum. I believe to the core of my being that there would be no inspectors in Iraq today without the threat of action by President Bush and the active support of PM Blair and other Western leaders. Without the credible threat of unilateral (read this as non-UN-sanctioned) military action by the US and other like-minded nations, the resolution re-instituting the inspections would not have been passed (unanimously, in case some have forgotten). Without the hawkish posture of the Bush administration, Iraq might have simply ignored the resolution. In other words, Bush is playing the diplomacy game, and doing it effectively. You can choose to believe he is just a dumb bully, but I do not.
Take a look at how this is playing out. They (Iraq) acknowledged Resolution 1444 (number?) reluctantly, believing the US and its allies would invade if they didn’t. They began almost immediately to play the same old games to buy time for international resolve to disintegrate. I offer the 12,000 page “declaration” as proof, along with Iraqi insistence that it was full and complete (hint: it wasn’t even close, and even Hans Blix, a man who’s past words and actions make it clear he’d rather believe Iraq’s assurances than find the truth, said it was 12,000 pages of doggie dung). The inspectors report that Iraq is not truly cooperating, and that this must change. The US and UK continue to work the diplomatic scene to build a “coalition of the willing”, while building that credible threat to the point that it’s clear we’re committed to a military solution if need be.
Knowing the US and its allies (allies against Iraqi, not necessarily other traditional allies like France and Germany) see the 27 Jan report to the UN Sec. Council as a go/no-go decision point on material breach, Iraq suddenly softens their tone and pledge greater cooperation (again, playing same old game). The discovery of the nuke program papers in Bahgdad and the chem.-weapon shells further softens Iraq defiance. Why? Because they know that if Blix and the IAE guy (sorry, can’t remember his name) report on 27 Jan that Iraq isn’t cooperating, then by the UN-agreed to resolution they will be in material breach. Military action will be assured, because Iraq believes Bush and Blair when they say, “Enough is enough!” Again, the tough talk by Bush and Blair, backed up by obvious preparations for war are forcing Iraq to cooperate. “If you would have peace, be thou then prepared for war.” Bush understands this. Will it be enough to force Iraqi disarmament and (possible) a regime change? Perhaps, perhaps not. The danger of carrying the big stick is that you may have to use it.
On the other hand, a bunch of Arab neighbors of Iraq are pressuring Suddam to go into exile. His own generals have probably already told him they can’t win a war with the West. I don’t believe Suddam cares about the Iraqi people, but I do believe he cares about himself. I believe he fears death. There is hope he may yet capitulate if he believes it’s the only way to personally survive. But he will not believe that unless he believes the US-led coalition is ready and willing to take him out by force…period.
N. Korea is a different story, and a different situation. Anyone complaining that the US should be dealing with these two partners in the Axis of Evil in the same way is hopelessly naive regarding geopolitics and diplomacy. One-size-fits-all international relations are impractical if not impossible. It is possible and even practical to remain consistent in our stance on WMD proliferation while still being flexible in how we deal with rogue nations attempting to procure/proliferate them. In closing, please remember that Suddam, not Bush, has not only sought to increase his WMD capability, but has used it against his own people and his neighbors. Suddam, not Bush, has ruthlessly oppressed, tortured, murdered, and starved his own people and the people of neighboring countries. The US has spent considerable resources in developing weapons that defeat the enemy with a minimum loss of non-combatant life, while Suddam has been doing the opposite. I challenge anyone to argue that Suddam’s Iraq is only [barely] contained today because Bush senior and Bush junior (and of course other stout-hearted leaders from allied nations) were willing to lead, rather than simply dither and fret through the dark corridors of UN impotence.
