May 6, 2004 :: Washington Times :: Analysis
Commenting on the appearance of Bush and Cheney before the 9-11 commission, William Hawkins argues in the
Washington Times that the criticism the administration has spent too much time addressing rogue states, nuclear and missile proliferation, and missile defense and not enough time on terrorism, is ill-founded, even dangerous, approach to take. Calling upon readers to take a broader, more strategic perspective, he notes that “such developments posed far greater threats to American security than did al Qaeda, and still do.” He goes on to describe the sort of strategic thinking which must prevail if America is to remain free, and the danger that the war on terrorism will become a distraction from these “graver threats.” Terrorism, he writes, is a tool of the weak. The danger, one may therefore infer, is that if the United States sees only these weak (or, as they are often called, “asymmetrical”) threats, we will neglect the greater, more traditional sources of power in the world.
Without larger resources, al-Qaeda cannot change the balance of power in the world. Wars are about politics, and politics is about the control of territory and people who are organized by states. Al-Moqrin was last reported fleeing from Saudi troops in the mountains northeast of Riyadh.
When President Bush came into office, many of the problems that had been glanced over in the 1990s — when it was naively felt a more harmonious “new world order” was taking shape, were coming to a head. North Korea’s nuclear ambitions were breaking containment. Pyongyang was also shipping rocket engines to Iran for testing, aiding both countries to expand their offensive capabilities. Iraq was using its U.N. “oil for food” program to support a diplomatic effort to wiggle out of the box it had been placed after the 1991 Gulf war. There was a rapid, global proliferation of ballistic missile technology, along with the means for nuclear, chemical and biological warheads.
On April 1, 2001, a U.S. Navy EP-3 reconnaissance plane was rammed by a Chinese interceptor over international waters. This triggered a crisis with Beijing, whose rising power was again demonstrating the historical link between economic growth and expanding ambition. China was also at the center of the proliferation of WMD technology.
Though September 11 has heightened concern over WMD terrorism, such weapons won’t be developed from scratch by some ad hoc gang of dissidents in a cave. It will be states who fund such programs. When Abdul Qadeer Khan, the “father” of Pakistan’s nuclear program, dealt in the tools to enrich uranium, his clients were Iran and Libya, probably North Korea and possibly Brazil and Egypt — entities able to use what he sold.
But given these graver threats, he goes on to argue that the invasion of Iraq is defensible as not only a part of the war on terrorism, but as a more strategic offensive against WMD and missile proliferation: “an action against a higher level of threat.”
(Article)
» More stories on: China, Russia
