Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

Through different eyes « Previous | |Next »
March 19, 2003

I've always wondered how the Iraqi regime strategically saw the approaching war. Did they think they could wriggle out of this one? Why did they allow the country to be destroyed by refusing to disarm? Why did it allow to be backed into a corner where it faces certain destruction?

The Saddam is evil & mad explanation is the one endlessly recycled in the Australian media. This media is content to parrot White House media releases without bothering to do any research work on Iraq. They are content with a non-explanation; an indication of the poverty of the Australian media.

This piece, Saddam's Strategy on the Brink of War, from the Brookings Institute locates his strategic thinking in terms of needing to hold onto power in Iraq and geopolitical considerations. It argues that:

"Saddam Husayn's refusal to part with his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs, even under severe pressure and the threat of a U.S. invasion, may appear self-destructive and irrational to an outside observer. However, Saddam sees his possession of WMD as essential to his and his regime's survival, as well as to his deeply held aspirations to hegemony and hero status in the Arab world."

This is a policy brief on US-Iranian relations. It is very optimistic and upbeat given that it was written in mid-2001 since it fails to consider the Bush neo-con strategy of taking out Iran because it is rogue state. The reason for the upbeatness can be found here. This supports the position of Ken Parish, It is contrary to my position that the US neo-con view is a Hobbesian one of an anarchic world of nation-states acting in their self-interest that requires a Leviathen (a hegemonic US) to keep order.

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 10:05 PM | | Comments (1)


I don't believe that SH could have done anything differently than he has done to avoid this showdown. Sept 11 and the election of the Cheney team was his death sentence. Maybe he could have left but maybe he figured he'd go even quicker once removed from behind his walled palaces. His only hope was that the USA backed down for domestic reasons. So he delayed and delayed, hoping agaist hope. But Cheney et al have prevailed. Curtains.