Military

DATE=10/31/01

TYPE=BACKGROUND REPORT

TITLE=WAR AIMS (2)

NUMBER=5-50419

BYLINE=ED WARNER

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

CONTENT=

VOICED AT:

///// RE-PRINTING WITH EDITED VERSION. /////

INTRO: At a CATO Institute meeting in Washington, participants debated whether to broaden the war against terrorism. In the second of two scripts, V-O-A's Ed Warner reports the divided opinion.

TEXT: Kim Holmes, of the Heritage Foundation, says other nations may object, but the United States is obligated to fight terrorism around the world:

/// HOLMES ACT ///

We should make our response to terrorism as broad as the threat itself. You have to go wherever the threat is present - concentrated now in Afghanistan, but clearly the threat is global. It is not only in terms of the network, but in terms of the states that support international terrorism.

/// END ACT ///

If the United States fails to defeat the terrorists, said Mr. Holmes, other nations will be reluctant to cooperate with us. Above all, Iraq's Saddam Hussein must be targeted:

/// HOLMES ACT ///

If he does get the nuclear weapon, he and Iraq become more or less the sanctuary by which we cannot touch him with any kind of military force, if he were in the future to support or personally engage in any kind of terrorism. Can you imagine what we would be doing if the Taleban for some reason had a nuclear weapon? We would be operating in a very different way.

/// END ACT ///

But Iraq is not close to having a nuclear capability, responded Columnist Robert Novak. Nor is there any evidence linking it to the attacks on the United States.

Mr. Novak said those urging action against Iraq tend to be strong supporters of Israel, which considers Saddam Hussein a prime enemy:

/// NOVAK ACT ///

If we attack Iraq, I do not think there is any question that we lose the British as an ally, quite apart from the rest of the Arab world, and we end up with the United States and Israel against the world. I think that is a very bad situation, but one that some people might welcome.

/// END ACT ///

By attacking Iraq or any other Muslim country, we fall into Osama bin Laden's trap, said Charles Freeman, former U-S ambassador to Saudi Arabia and president of the Middle East Policy Council. The terrorist has clear objectives:

/// FREEMAN ACT ///

First, to ignite the war between civilizations, setting Muslims against non-Muslims and broadening the conflict to the extent he can, enlisting the entire Muslim world against the rest of the world. Second, destroy U-S Saudi relations and drive the American forces out of Saudi Arabia, leaving the regime naked to its enemies.

/// END ACT ///

Oddly enough, said Ambassador Freeman, much of the American media appears to be collaborating with Osama's anti-Saudi campaign. There has been extensive press criticism of the Saudi ruling royal family and its U-S ties. Why give Osama a helping hand, he asks? (SIGNED)

NEB/EW/RAE