December 18, 2002
The Administration today finds Iraq in material breach of the UN resolution in its weapons report. Although the Administration does not name it material breach, the finding is the same. This indicates ongoing US movement toward war. While some may have believed that entanglement in UN inspections might derail war and leave Hussein in place, there remains a strong undercurrent in the Administration toward war. The news today is another manifestation of that undercurrent breaking through to the surface.
Analyst Gary D. Halbert poses two strong geopolitical reasons the Administration has for war. One is to establish a permanent and substantial US military presence in the Middle East. Such a move, if successful, would give the United States a decisive role in world oil, free it from decades of crippling political deference to Saudi Arabia, and give it a much stronger hand to deal with Middle East unrest.
The second reason is to signal unalterable US commitment to defeating global terrorism by Al Queda and supporters.
Analysts earlier this year posed another reason for war against the Iraqi regime -- to signal a stand against further inroads by militant Islam aiming at global domination, and secondarily to provide cover for moderate Muslims who can challenge tyrannical Islamic regimes.
Which of these reasons is dominant in the Administration is inconsequential. The fact is, war is coming. Probably soon.
The dangers ahead are many -- a costly and easily prolonged war; disruption of US and global economic recovery; great stimulation of Al Queda recruitment; incitement of US opponents in both friendly and unfriendly nations; opportunism by North Korean leadership; opportunism by China against Taiwan; potential for fundamentalist takeover of moderate regimes in Islamic countries; and further proliferation of ABC [atomic, biological, and chemical] weapons. When a hornet's nest is smashed, the angry survivors proliferate elsewhere.
Each of these dangers is large enough for concern. More fundamental, however, is the burgeoning attitude by the United States toward global hegemony. The recently announced geopolitical-military policy of the right of pre-emptive attack is just one of its manifestations.
China is all too cognizant of this global change. Not strong enough to challenge it now, China nevertheless is capable of long-term chess until its powers are sufficient. There is no doubt that China looks ahead to a potential century-long dominance by the United States, and finds it unacceptable.
For those of Christian faith, the question to ask is whether the United States has been given a hegemonic destiny. God raises up nations and puts them down. The nation was founded on the Creator's grant of inalienable rights and liberty, and its political structure and domestic and foreign policies were built of republican democratic procedures. Hegemony by design is inconsistent with this foundation. Unless the nation behaves as a humble servant-leader, and wisely promotes the global extension of its own God-given foundation, it risks divine displeasure. No nation is its own master.
Dr. John C. Munday