More on the Coalition of the Bribed

[billroper]

This article from the Times of London quotes from a leaked report that gives a great deal of information about Saddam's work to bribe France, Russia, and China via the Oil for Food program and how he skimmed off profits for his own use.

Comments

[minnehaha.livejournal.com]

"I would dearly love to hear that question -- 'Senator Kerry, given that influential French, Russian, and Chinese figures were being bribed by Saddam Hussein's government via the Oil for Food program prior to the Iraq invasion, how is it that you feel that you could have successfully enlisted those countries in a coalition against Hussein, or indeed even obtained yet another UN Security Council resolution in the face of such a situation?' -- put to Kerry in a debate."

I don't know how he would answer the question, but I can imagine my own answer. It might go something like this: "Diplomacy is the art of making someone do what they don't want to do, and then thank you for the privilege. France, Germany, and Russia certainly had substantial financial interests in Hussein remaining in power. Hussein was a smart politician, and he played the game of international politics well. But if Hussein can play politics, America can play politics smarter. Bush's reckless 'bring em on' attitude pushed our allies away, and played right into Hussein's hands. So instead of a broad-based coalition against Hussein, we ended up going in alone: bearing the brunt of the casualties, the brunt of the financial costs, and the brunt of Arab anger."

"Bush can't do it, because then he would be guilty of exactly the same sort of 'dissing' of an ally that he (with some justification) has accused Kerry of with respect to those countries that actually did join the coalition."

Oh, I don't know. He's dissed so many of our allies that a few more won't do him any more damage.

There's something else here, something even more important. There isn't just Bush's oil interests vs. France/Russia/China's oil interests. There isn't just your way or my way. There's also right and wrong. There are morals and there are ethics. There's smart security and dumb security. The U.S. invasion of Iraq, our pre-emptive war, was wrong. It was bad ethics, and it was bad security. Bush did a stupid thing. Just because France/Russia/China had unethical reasons to oppose it doesn't mean that they weren't right.

The Republicans are using this as "these countries were bribed, so it was okay for us to bribe our coalition." Bullshit. Bribery is wrong. Bush's "coalition of the willing" was an embarrassment, a coalition of countries bribed, coerced, and lied to. That was wrong. And it's nonsense to claim that it was okay because others are doing it too. I expect the U.S. to be more moral than other countries. I expect us not to torture, even if the bad guys do it. I expect us to play well on the world stage, even if our allies are not. I expect this country to be what the world aspires to, not what is derided.

And I certainly don't expect us to put our own citizens at unnecessary risk by invading another country without spending time on the requisite diplomacy.

B