To: The Cleveland Plain Dealer
Date:  January 21, 2004
Subject: What we didn't try before war in Iraq 
Result: not printed

Dear Editor,

"The people of Iraq are free." So declared President Bush in his State of the Union address.

I have to wonder about that. Number one, "freedom" always rings hollow when there is not a minimum level of economic security, which most Iraqis will probably never have.

Moreover, in our "liberation" of the Iraqi people from one totalitarian, evil government, all we have done is prepare them for the next round of oppressors. What the "democracy" of the Iraqis will likely come down to is the religious leaders of the Shiite majority will impose a Taliban-style of government on the women and the people of Iraq.

Of course, it will be the majority – that is, of the men –  shaking their fists in obedience to whatever the imams say, so there you'll have it, democracy.

The truth is, when it comes to influencing the future government and policies of Iraq, we lost the best chance we had. It was with Saddam. Yes, Saddam.

The President said in his speech that, because of our actions in Iraq, President Khadafi of Libya realized it would be to his advantage to give up some of his policies and programs and join the world community.

Maybe Saddam could have been persuaded of the same thing without having to go to war over it. How? How about this? President Bush goes to him directly and says, hey Saddam, let's talk. Just you and me. Man to man. Leader to leader. Saddam, who was clearly concerned about being invaded by us, had already provided and indicated all kinds of flexibility with regard to inspections. We could have written our own ticket with him, I believe. But President Bush, who says he tried everything before going to war, didn't want to do that. He doesn't talk to terrorists.

As I said in a letter to the editor in 1998 – unprinted, like all my letters to the editor, since newspapers don't like people who question their commitment to the freedom of speech – if we would have initiated civil relations with Saddam, which would have taken place under the watchful eyes of the whole world, it would have forced him to be on his best behavior with us and to be nice to everybody. It would have also made it a lot easier to monitor his actions. That is an opportunity that I don't think we will have with the future government of Iraq.

You may say, well, there's no use talking about this now because, right or wrong, we're in Iraq, and now we have to just deal with it the best we can. But to me, maybe we could apply that same lesson, for example, to North Korea.  George W. Bush could go become friends with Kim Jong-il and I bet accomplish all kinds of things.

Thank you,  John Vehon

_____________________________________________________________