Imagine Col. Muammar Qaddafi offering to join forces with the United States. Or Syrian troops side-by-side with U.S. soldiers on guard against a common enemy. Imagine these two events taking place on Arab soil with other Arab nations supporting them. And then add Soviet consent. The plot of a new novel or the scenario of Hollywood's latest movie? No, this is global politics in a post-Cold War crisis. The unbelievable is happening all around us. The world revolted against Saddam Hussein when he invaded and annexed Kuwait and in doing so created a new global coalition to prevent further Iraqi aggression.
Preinvasion animosities have been put aside, the United Nations has condemned Iraqi actions and imposed sanctions, and even the Arab Council condemned their brethren in Baghdad. Yet even with such broadbased support, U.S. and global options inevitably come to mind: Are economic sanctions enough? Should an international brigade try to liberate Kuwait and the hostages held in Iraq?
The WORLD & I presents a special feature on the many dilemmas of the still-unfolding Persian Gulf crisis. Desert war, by land or by air, poses daunting problems, writes Adam Garfinkle of the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and could result in thousands of U.S. casualties, doom the hostages, and “undermine support for the war at home.” Yet failure to restrain Hussein now could result in his attaining ominous strength, including nuclear capabilities, not far down the road.
Shifting from battlefield to the oil field, the central question is: Who gains and who loses? In economic terms, even if other nations (like Saudi Arabia) are able to make up the
...
Read Full Article
|
