Has Saddam provided himself with some critical breathing space? I’ve tunnelled through motives, burrowed beyond weaknesses and faults and I remain uncomfortable. I am left with many doubts and unanswered questions. Saddam has been feeding the fires of revolt. There is a certain fear and resentment. He’s a dangerous man. He is deceitful, cruel and aggressive and bears a hatred and contempt for the US. He’s a shrewd bastard. Perhaps more than all else, is the recklessness lurking beneath Saddam, ready at any instance to burst open in a madness. The man is not only stupid but also wicked. He is nothing save his ambition.

I’ve asked myself - why is it happening, why is he pushing the US (and for that fact UN) to the limit? Has he convinced himself that the fault lies with the West? Does his honour demand revenge? What is he trying to prove? What is he contriving? I would be extremely wary - he must surely have knowledge of something closed and hidden, undiscovered and not yet interpreted, which is enabling him to remain threatening. What lies behind it - even I am not quite sure but it rings alarm bells in my mind. I believe there are inadequacies in present information as to his capabilities. Saddam may go further than we expect and suffice to say future events may lead to an appalling combination of circumstances. The risk is not hard to analyse nor quantify.

Yes, it’s a delicate issue and divisions open up every time it comes into the open. Consensus agreement in the UN regarding US proposals may not eventuate but they can’t walk away from such a threat - Saddam is too dangerous for that. There will always be those who are critical of the US and there’s nothing wrong with that. Problems of diplomacy and ethics have become sharper and compromises with standards of objectivity and niceties are now more likely to be made.

At present they are caught in a dangerous flux of tension and in the development of conflict. The American’s are keeping things underwraps vis-a-vis informational flow. Military intervention, is the goal, and there are no are limits to the means they would deploy. I believe intervention is only justified if it is directed at change for the better, in the environment, or in the structures which determine and influence that environment. One has to ask if escalating military moves prove effective? I watch the build up of tension and military hardware and remain extremely concerned as to where it will end. May be such a military build-up and maneuvering is meant to show Iraq the force they can expect to face and is a form of rational persuasion, which has nothing to do with coercion but is it strong enough to stand on its own? Saddam is being backed into a corner and there is now greater pressure on Saddam to employ measures that address growing concerns over chemical/nuclear capabilities. Whatever the eventual outcome, I understand that we cannot allow the prudential safety and stability of the region to be weakened in anyway nor can we allow him to threaten the world with mass destruction.