The possibility of war with Iraq has encompassed the thoughts of most Americans.
Mary Caprioli, a UT professor of political science, has her own opinion on war said she thought the United States would end up taking military action against Iraq.
“I think Bush has to do some work to gain support again from our allies and I think ultimately, Saddam Hussein, given his track record, will do something to annoy our allies,” Caprioli said.
Caprioli said once Iraq does not hold up to the U.N. resolutions, it will give the United States the excuse to go to war and gain the support of our allies, even Germany.
“I think it (military action) would be relatively quick and decisive, nothing like the war on terrorism,” Caprioli said.
Caprioli, whose expertise is conflict and cooperation on foreign policy, said Iraq would use his biological and chemical weapons against whatever troops were attacking him and Israel.
“I think if we push too hard and back him against the wall, then he would use his biological and chemical weapons,” she said. “There’d be no deterrent threat.”
She did not know how effective his biological and chemical weapons would be, and stated that many of those weapons are hard to use because you need the right weather conditions.
“I don’t know how devastating it would be,” Caprioli said. “But, I do think he will try to use them.”
One option she said might keep him from using them is for the United States or the allies to give him an out.
“I don’t think he’s trigger happy and will immediately use them,” she said.
Caprioli thought the United States would support Iraq following the removal of Hussein. However, she was not concerned over the threat to U.S. peace keepers.
“I think with a peace keeping operation, we would try to get a lot of the Turks,” she said. “I think we’d very strategically put peacekeeping troops in there (in Iraq) – probably fewer Americans because there is such hatred.”
When asked if the Turkish peace keepers would come into conflict with the ethnic Kurds in the north of Iraq, Caprioli said part of the problem with going to war with Iraq is the power vacuum that will be created in the Middle East.
“What’s going to replace the state of Iraq?” she asked. “What power will that country have? Will there be political disarray? Will it spill over into the other countries?”
She said she did not see there being that much of a problem with the Kurds because they are not that powerful.
“From a strategic perspective, I don’t think it (Kurdish violence) will be that big of an issue – certainly not to U.S. national security,” she said.
Caprioli said she does not favor action against Iraq.
“I don’t think the case has been made to my satisfaction,” she said. “There’s some rumblings that we have hard evidence, but none has been forthcoming. Even members of Congress have said, ‘No, there’s not enough information out there. We don’t have enough facts.'”
She went on to add that she worried about the precedent the United States would be setting with a pre-emptive strike.
“I think it’s very dangerous to set the precedent of a pre-emptive strike saying that he (Hussein) will be a danger in the future, because other countries can use the same argument,” Caprioli said. “In the international arena, the only legal use of force is self-defense. So, we’ll be violating international law. We will not be using force in self-defense, because we can’t say for sure that he will cause a problem.
“What if India said Pakistan is going to be a threat, or vice versa?” she asked. “What would prevent them from saying, ‘Look, the U.S. did it. Why can’t we?'”
Caprioli said it was important for people to understand that we can not read the president’s mind.
“At this point, it’s very hard to tell if Bush is basically Hell-bent on using force or if he is making a credible threat,” she said. “You have to bluff. In the international arena, you have to bluff. I can’t predict whether Bush has the train full speed ahead … or if he’s being very savvy politically.”
