Iraq: Opening Options

Among the various arguments for and against war on Iraq, four require reconciliation if the UN and international legitimacy are to be preserved and a better future delivered for Iraqis. These arguments are represented by the French and British governments and two schools of thought within the US administration: the traditional ‘realists’ including Secretary of State Colin Powell, and the ideologues, or neo-conservatives, championed by Richard Pearle, head of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board.

The World Today
4 minute READ

Rosemary Hollis

Former Director, Olive Tree Israeli-Palestinian Scholarship Programme, City, University of London

Neo-conservative voices in the United States have been calling for regime change in Baghdad as the first step in a grand scheme to re-order the Middle East. Their rationale for how this will tackle the causes of terrorism rests on the assumption that these derive from corrupt regimes and Islamist extremism. While they are about it, they blame their European allies for compounding the problem by pursuing material self-interest in places like Iraq and Iran, and seemingly excusing the behaviour of some terrorists, notably Palestinian ones, on the grounds of provocation.

Subscribe to read all issues

Articles from the current issue are free to read by all, the archive is exclusive to magazine subscribers and our members. Subscribe or become a member to view articles from the archive.