Matthew Yglesias points out that the only possible rational justification remaining for the War on Saddam Hussein is if it leads to a better future for the Iraqi people. All the other rational justifications have hit the garbage can. Remove the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction? Keep dangerous terror weapons out of the hands of Al Qaeda and company? Strengthen international law? Enhance the international standing of the United States. All in the garbage can. Only if the aftermath of war is and is seen to be an enormous improvement in the quality of life for Iraqis can this still be turned into a strategic victory for America.
Posted by DeLong at May 6, 2003 12:25 PM | TrackBackMatthew Yglesias: Daniel Pipes is tired of war as social work.
Something similar is now occurring on the subject of Iraq: Gains to Americans and Britons from getting rid of Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction and sponsorship of terrorism seem to matter less than the outcome of plans to rehabilitate Iraq. The difficulties in fixing Iraq are being used to cast doubt on the whole military venture.It's a nice story, but I'd be a lot more convinced if it turned out that our war actually had eliminated the security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Instead, that threat seems to have been exaggerated and the weapons have slipped through our hands. So there haven't been any real security gains and we may, in fact, have taken a step backwards. Under those circumstances, only a well-run postwar effort that really does benefit ordinary Iraqis is going to be able to save this operation from going down in history as one of America's great blunders. So, yes, war as social work.[...]
So, by all means, bring on "Iraqi Freedom." But always keep in mind, as President Bush has done, that the ultimate war goal is to enhance American security.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/06/opinion/06KRIS.html
May 6, 2003
Missing in Action: Truth
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF - NYTimes
When I raised the Mystery of the Missing W.M.D. recently, hawks fired barrages of reproachful e-mail at me. The gist was: "You *&#*! Who cares if we never find weapons of mass destruction, because we've liberated the Iraqi people from a murderous tyrant."
But it does matter, enormously, for American credibility. After all, as Ari Fleischer said on April 10 about W.M.D.: "That is what this war was about."
I rejoice in the newfound freedoms in Iraq. But there are indications that the U.S. government souped up intelligence, leaned on spooks to change their conclusions and concealed contrary information to deceive people at home and around the world.
Let's fervently hope that tomorrow we find an Iraqi superdome filled with 500 tons of mustard gas and nerve gas, 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin, 29,984 prohibited munitions capable of delivering chemical agents, several dozen Scud missiles, gas centrifuges to enrich uranium, 18 mobile biological warfare factories, long-range unmanned aerial vehicles to dispense anthrax, and proof of close ties with Al Qaeda. Those are the things that President Bush or his aides suggested Iraq might have, and I don't want to believe that top administration officials tried to win support for the war with a campaign of wholesale deceit....
Posted by: bill on May 6, 2003 12:55 PMSocial work? Or social science experiment?
If the intended benefits follow from well-accepted realtionships between action and results, we might consider it social work.
But they don't, do they? At best it's a grand experiment ... human expermentation, with substantial risk of death (among other potential adverse consequences).
As such, established protocol would require informed consent, would it not?
Posted by: RonK, Seattle on May 6, 2003 10:01 PMI wished social or other scientists were given the means to carry out such *expensive* experiments... Like spending some resources on figuring out the treachourous dynamics of global climatic changes. Talk about world security for your bucks!
Posted by: Jean-Philippe Stijns on May 7, 2003 02:54 PM