A Diplomatic Solution?

Americans are being barraged with the rhetoric that a "diplomatic solution" is required to prevail in Iraq. As one thinks about those words it is impossible not to contemplate the fact that the failure of diplomacy was what caused the conflict in the first place.

Saddam Hussein and the former government of Iraq completely disregarded the efforts of the United States, the United Nations and the world at large to obtain some cooperation from this rogue state that totally disregarded the basic human rights of millions of their citizens in favor of a few. A militant government existed that used poison gas (a weapon of mass destruction) on their own citizens and ruled through fear and terror. There was no major power in the world that publicly expressed doubt about the existence of weapons of mass destruction despite the fact that very few have been found. Now, one is led to believe that all the world's intelligence networks failed and one of the greatest hoaxes to be perpetuated upon the world was created by an Iraqi government that wanted everyone to believe they possessed weapons of mass destruction when they did not. Nevertheless, the failure of diplomacy to successfully address the issues provided the basis for war.

As history is examined to ascertain how diplomatic solutions have ended a war once hostilities commenced, one is hard pressed to find relative and successful examples. The fact is that warring parties have pounded one or the other into submission so that capitulation was the only way to end hostilities with the necessary follow on being diplomacy. Failing efforts resort to diplomacy. In American History, the Revolutionary War ended because England could just not afford to continue to prosecute the war. They lost their will. The Civil War ended with surrender. World War I ended because of overpowering force and because diplomacy failed after the end of the war, it gave birth to World War II which ended with Germany and Japan surrendering unconditionally. The diplomatic efforts after World War II with the Marshall Plan in Europe and under MacArthur leadership in Japan were extremely effective and have produced democratic nations and economic well being for these former enemies.

Rome fell because of a constant barbaric assault when diplomacy and accommodation failed to insure the survival of this once great empire. Diplomacy did not stop Napoleon as he sought to conquer all of Europe. The weather and the will of the Russians to resist and the will of the English prevailed on the battlefield. Only then was diplomacy utilized to sort out the maze of confusion created by war. Some failures and some successes were recorded.

In all wars, innocent people are killed, wounded and uprooted, in addition to the lose of lives of soldiers. Cities are destroyed, economies are devastated, childhood innocence is lost. War is an abomination. War however, is about the will to prevail. It cannot be entered into lightly, on the cheap or with the expectation of a quick victory or the party selecting that route will be disappointed and defeated. Even with overpowering force the results can never be guaranteed. The will of the participants to prevail on the battlefields, along the roads and in the cities and villages is the biggest determinate of success.

Modern war has sought to wrangle over the "hearts and minds" of the affected noncombatant populations with either fear and terror or the promise of a better life for families and future generations being the call to elicit cooperation. Sadly, fear and terror seem to produce more immediate results.

Now the population of the United States has lost their will. Led by a few, the many are now ready to capitulate and turn Iraq over to the very people that would return it to a dictatorship where fear and terror will reign once again. Time will tell if it will become a haven for future generations of terrorists. The experience of Vietnam will once again be repeated. Hundreds of thousands of innocents will be sacrificed if the United States withdraws. The "diplomatic solution" will be defeat for the United States and death to many Iraqi's that sported purple fingers and sought the freedom that was offered, but unable to be delivered because of the lack of the will to prevail.

Soldiers will return and be welcomed home, but will know in their hearts that while they fought valiantly, their efforts were for naught. Many of their brothers in arms will have died for the failed will of the very governmental leaders that voted to send them there in the first place. One has to wonder if there will be soldiers available to protect America in the future based on the documented evidence over the last 50 years of two failed wars, a failed venture into Somalia and the recorded absence of the will to prevail that seems to be prevalent amongst our elected leaders.

The present surge in Iraq is the last opportunity to prevail, but it seems that in the very midst of this effort that has the promise of success that our elected leaders have already lost their will to the polls that show the American disaffection toward war. This is a natural disaffection borne by a people that are predisposed to see a clear beginning and a definitive end to events. Sadly, it appears as if all the words of support for our soldiers will be lost in the clamor for their return home and the end to hostilities. Clearly, the "diplomatic solution" is simply a substitution for defeat. Bless all those that have sacrificed their lives for this effort. Perhaps victory can still be achieved. I remain optimistic.

Hopefully the lesson for the future will be overwhelming destructive force, brutality on the battlefield for any that oppose or appear to oppose our presence and great magnanimity when victory is achieved. We learned this in the merciless bombings of Germany and the massacres at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Great sacrifices gave way to now great nations. Would the total destruction of Baghdad have given birth to a more democratic Iraq? Destruction in Germany and Japan proved successful for the generations that reaped the benefit. Perhaps there is a hidden truth to "we had to destroy the village to save it."