Debate rages on Iraq issue

A debate is raging in Washington about the best way to topple Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, with senior figures questioning what will happen when he is gone.

Secretary of State Colin Powell and CIA Director George Tenet are leading the sceptics who say the current policy of using sanctions to contain Iraq has worked, the Washington Post said today.

And on Capitol Hill, influential senators from both parties are also beginning to question how thoroughly the government has prepared for a potential confrontation with Baghdad.

Meanwhile, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld favour aggressively confronting Saddam, the Post said. They say he presents a serious threat to the West and that time is not on Washington’s side.

But many senior military officers oppose a US invasion of Iraq, arguing that the cost and uncertainties outweigh the likely benefits.

Government leaders in Europe and the Middle East have warned that an attack that removes Saddam could trigger an unpredictable power struggle in Iraq and threaten regional stability.

But the American public appear broadly to support some form of military action. A recent opinion poll showed more than 60% of Americans supporting the use of force in Iraq, “and that is without the administration doing much selling of the idea,” said Andrew Kohut of the Pew Research Centre.

A number of different plans for a military campaign have surfaced recently, including one involving taking Baghdad and certain key weapons sites first - essentially the reverse of the tactics used in the 1991 Gulf War.

Meanwhile, Congressional leaders, citing scepticism abroad and differences at home, are pressing the government for a convincing assessment of the threats posed by Saddam – and how to counter them.

“You can’t just drop the 82nd Airborne into Baghdad and it will all be over,” said Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, a Foreign Relations Committee member who has reservations about a military assault.

The committee is meeting again today to continue discussing Iraq.

Committee Chairman Senator Joseph Biden said if President George Bush was going to send hundreds of thousands of Americans into battle, it was important to do so with the support of the US people.

But he said he would not call administration officials to testify this time because he did not want to interfere with internal discussions over what to do about Iraq and Saddam.

Biden suggested that any action was not likely to come soon, saying he would be “very, very surprised” if the US moved against Baghdad before next year.

But some senators still cautioned against launching an attack without a clear plan of what to do afterwards.

“Unease is a fair description of the feeling” on Capitol Hill, said Senator Christopher Dodd Biden appeared to agree. “It would be a tragedy if we removed a tyrant in Iraq, only to leave chaos,” he said.

One of the most outspoken senators, John Kerry of Massachusetts, summed up the feeling of many European diplomats, warning that the White House was being dismissive of friends and allies in the Middle East and elsewhere – friends it might need later on.