Taking part in the growing national debate on Iraq, Chancellor
Albert Carnesale, UCLA’s resident expert in national
security, said in an interview Tuesday that the United States
should not go to war with Iraq with the sole objective of removing
Saddam Hussein from power.
A former advisor to both the Department of Defense and the
director of the CIA, Carnesale believes weapons of mass destruction
pose a greater threat than Hussein remaining in power.
“I do not think that it’s an appropriate objective
to invade a country to change its leadership,” Carnesale
said.
Drawing on experience garnered from advising the government on
nuclear policy spanning from the Carter to the first Bush
administrations, he said there is no claim by U.S. intelligence
agencies that Hussein possesses nuclear weapons.
Carnesale also said Hussein has not shown that he is
psychologically inclined to use of weapons of mass destruction even
if he had them.
“My own impression is that Saddam Hussein’s behavior
has been basically rational,” Carnesale said, adding that the
Iraqi leader is not rational in the sense that he does what is best
for his country, but rather what is best to keep himself in
power.
According to Carnesale, using weapons of mass destruction would
run counter to that goal because it would encourage attempts to
destabilize him.
Carnesale cautions that Hussein would be “more inclined to
use (weapons of mass destruction) if that is the only possibility
to preserve power,” and that Bush must allow Hussein room to
maneuver for a peaceful resolution.
“Always leave your adversary some way out. Do not force
him to fight to the death,” he said.
Iraq announced last Wednesday it would comply with a U.N.
resolution that requires it to give weapons inspectors unrestricted
access to the country.
Carnesale said that, should U.N. weapons inspectors find
evidence of nuclear or biological weapons in Iraq, and should
Hussein prove uncooperative, the United States would be able to
rally the support of an international coalition to disarm
Hussein.
Carnesale warned against the United States declaring war on the
basis of Iraq’s firing on U.S. warplanes.
“You wouldn’t get an international coalition to go
to war because Iraqi guns fired against American aircraft,”
he said.
Some nations question the legitimacy of the U.S.-patrolled
“no-fly zones” over Iraq.
On Monday, U.S. warplanes bombed Iraqi antiaircraft guns that
fired upon them, an Iraqi move that infuriated Washington with what
White House spokesman Scott McClellan cited as a “material
breach” of the U.N. resolution.
In addition, Carnesale addressed the issue of the United States
assaulting Iraq while al-Qaeda is still at large.
In his opinion, the United States should not allow the presence
of al-Qaeda to postpone an attack, if an attack is warranted. But,
the nation would have to accept the risk of an increase in
terrorist attacks by al-Qaeda if it attacks a nation of Muslim
people.
“Weapons of mass destruction pose a significant threat if
(possession of them) is allowed to go unabated, and sometimes you
have to make trade-offs,” Carnesale said, alluding to the
partial trade of decisive military action for homeland
security.
Carnesale also said a great threat to national security resides
with states like Iraq that could arm terrorists with weapons of
mass destruction.
“As a general rule, it is hard to think up scenarios in
which terrorist groups get nuclear weapons without the support of
some state,” Carnesale said.
A 1966 graduate in nuclear engineering from the North Carolina
State University, Carnesale worked from 1969 to 1972 as an advisor
to Department of Defense and the State Department. Carnesale also
served as a delegate to the SALT I talks and as part of
Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative.
Carnesale will be teaching an honors seminar titled
“Rethinking National Security” next quarter. The
seminar will focus on threats to national security and how these
threats should be resolved.
The Fiat Lux seminars give priority registration to freshmen,
but open enrollment begins Dec. 9.
He concluded his remarks on Iraq by saying that, regardless of
whether the United States goes to war with Iraq or not, long-term
involvement is necessary.
“It will take something more than simply having inspectors
go in and saying: “˜We found something.'”
“It’s going to require some sort of continual
presence (by weapons inspectors).”