Can Iraq Be Won?

In moving to topple Saddam Hussein's regime, the Bush administration stakes its case on two critical arguments. First, President Bush and his senior aides insist that the coming Iraq war is an extension of the military campaign against terrorism. It would spare America and the world, in the words of Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, "the danger that Iraq's weapons of mass terror could fall into the hands of terrorists."

Second, the Bush team is pledging to bring democracy to Iraq, a transformation that - it is hoped - will spur democratization across the region. A peaceful, democratic dawn in Iraq, they assert, would soon break over other authoritarian Arab states as well. By transforming the political landscape of the Middle East, American officials hope to strike at the root causes of Islamic extremism.

Messrs. Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney and Wolfowitz like to pose as realists, but just how realistic is such thinking? Is it based on a sober assessment of the complex realities in Iraq and the region? Or is it driven by ideology and wishful thinking? Will a war against Iraq help the US in its fight against terrorists, or will it make Americans more vulnerable?

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To read this article from our archive, please log in or register now. After entering your email, you'll have access to two free articles from our archive every month. For unlimited access to Project Syndicate, subscribe now.


By proceeding, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which describes the personal data we collect and how we use it.

Log in;

Cookies and Privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. To find out more, read our updated cookie policy and privacy policy.