John J. Mearsheimer & Stephen M. Walt - Can Saddam be contained? History says yes

Résumé du document

This text was written in November 2002 by John J. Mearsheimer, a professor of political science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University. It takes part in the aftermath of 9/11, and the debate over the necessity of a war in Iraq, to prevent it from getting weapons of mass destruction. The authors contest the necessity of a preemptive war and stand up for a policy of containment. Most of the reasons advanced by the advocates of war are not convincing (" Saddam is a bloodshed tyrant, he backs terrorism, war will spread democracy?), as well as their belief that Saddam Hussein is too dangerous to be deterred or contained if he acquires nuclear weapons. Both history and logic undermine this argument.

Extraits

[...] And a the end of the conflict, Saddam was reluctant to withdraw its army from Kuwait for two reasons : it would have undermined his prestige at home and he also thought that hanging though would work. Advocates of a preventive war also point out the past use Saddam Hussein made of chemical weapons, in Iran and against the Kurds, and so the threat he represents. But the kurdish people didn't have a similar arsenal and could not threaten to respond. [...]

[...] There is no evidence of any connection between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, due to the genuine animosity between Osma Bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. There is no point for Saddam in doing such an handoff, for it would jeopardy existence. One the other hand such a transfer would not be unnoticed and the United State would inevitably know about it. As a conclusion, the proponents of the war in Irak try to inflate the threat to justify their stance. [...]

[...] Would have they acted this way if Saddam Hussein had been such a threat and an irrational madman ? Those who call for war also assert that containment will not prevent Irak from getting WMD and that then Saddam Hussein would blackmail its neighbours and even supply Al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations. But there is no good reason why the United States can not contain a nuclear Irak as it contained the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The United State have a massive nuclear arsenal that it would use against Irak if it struck first against another state with nuclear weapons. [...]

[...] Walt - Can Saddam be contained? History says yes This tex twas written in Novembre 2002 by John J. Mearsheimer, professor of political science at the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University. It takes part in the aftermath of 9/11 and the debate over the necessity of a war in irak, to prevent it from getting weapons of mass destruction. The authors contest the necessity of a preemptive war and stand up for a policy of containment. [...]