The Games We Play

Watching President Bush at the United Nations brought to mind the World Cup, the pinnacle event in a sport everyone knows Americans can’t play. Even after a string of upsets, an appearance at the quarterfinals, and speculation that the United States might actually win, no one was really upset when the team lost to Germany. After all, soccer actually matters to Germany.

For a few days following President Bush’s address to the U.N. on Sept. 12, it looked like the U.S. would have a chance at redemption. The world knows the current administration doesn’t play multilateralist games, so it was even more surprising when Bush whipped the U.N. into line using the moralistic language of international law. Preoccupied with voicing their increasingly shrill demands that the United States consult the U.N., France, Russia, Germany and the rest of the gang apparently missed the fact that Iraq is not in compliance with several Security Council resolutions. Bush was able to paint himself as the champion of internationalist legitimacy and corral his allies at the same time.

Then it was Iraq’s turn to show off its skills. You want inspections? Sure, why not? They didn’t do much harm the first go-around.

Oh well. This just isn’t our game. The U.N. actually matters to Iraq.

No one wants to publicly admit that Iraq and the U.N. are playing a game. Journalists and diplomats who take Iraq’s latest moves seriously are either dishonest or remarkably dense. Does anyone really find it hard to believe that Saddam Hussein prefers to prolong his life rather than face certain destruction at the hands of the most destructive military force ever created? Hussein will work with the U.N. because convincing a huge multinational bureaucracy to dither and delay is much more rewarding that having your house blown up.

Thus the lack of substance behind Iraq’s ploy. Contrary to a current myth, Iraq did not promise to permit unconditional inspections. In a letter from Iraq’s foreign minister to Kofi Annan, Iraq promised to “allow the return of the inspectors without conditions.” See the difference between what Iraq is offering and unconditional inspections? Though inspectors may be permitted to physically return to the country, Iraq makes no promises about the inspections that would presumably follow.

Iraq’s refusal of a U.S. inspection proposal this weekend proves that Hussein has every intention to saddle inspectors with as many conditions as he can. Apparently the Iraqi government prefers the old U.N. model, which should be reason enough to reject it immediately. This version, based on 1999 Security Council resolutions, forces inspectors to negotiate with Iraqi officials before entering buildings without an obvious military purpose, just the kind of place a dictator is likely to hide sensitive weapons. On top of everything, the U.N. doesn’t expect to have inspectors on the ground until six months from now, giving Hussein the chance to prepare his stash of anthrax, dig up old canisters of VX and throw everything he has at developing a nuclear bomb. Weapons inspection is a tedious process, and the first phase will be spent just figuring out which installations need to be inspected. If the inspectors are ever on the verge of finding something important, Iraq can always throw them out or obstruct their work, since there is no enforcement mechanism. At the end of this spectacle, we’ll be in exactly the same position as we are now, except that Iraq will have had more time to prepare for war.

I once read a story about a criminal who was about to be hanged. At the last minute, he shouted out to the king, who happened to be standing nearby, “If you give me one year, I can make your horse fly.” The king, astounded at this promise, agreed. Back in his cell, another prisoner asked him whether he could really make a horse fly. The criminal replied, “No, but in a year the horse might be dead.” Any number of events could occur in the next year that would make intervention in Iraq more difficult than it is now. An Iraqi agent could get lucky and pick up a supply of weapons grade plutonium at some Central Asian garage sale. The U.S. political environment might shift against a firm position on Iraq. Hussein is as likely to willingly dismantle his arms program as he is to make a horse fly. At least the king only fell for this trick once.

Now that Iraq has won this round of diplomatic shilly-shallying, critics are calling on the administration to give up. But whatever the outcome of the U.N.’s diversion, war seems as likely as before. The official administration policy remains regime change, and Congress is on the verge of passing a resolution authorizing force in Iraq. Once the U.S. makes it clear that Hussein is gone, the game is up.

Ebon Y. Lee ’04 is a government concentrator in Lowell House. His column appears on alternate Mondays.