Edward I. Koch
Friday, Feb. 14, 2003

It was hard not to be swayed by Secretary of State Colin Powell’s compelling presentation at the U.N. Security Council. One prominent opponent to using armed force, Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf, changed his position and now supports military action to enforce U.N. Resolution 1441.

However, there are those, including our NATO allies France, Germany and Belgium, who inexcusably refuse to budge from their anti-war stance, no matter how strong the evidence is that Saddam Hussein poses an intolerable risk to world peace and security.

For 12 years, the world has tried unsuccessfully to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction, including poison gas and biological agents. Even those who oppose war concede that Saddam Hussein is capable of immediately launching attacks using both gas and disease and will soon have a nuclear capability.

They do not even deny that Hussein murdered thousands of Kurds and Iranians using chemical weapons and permanently maimed thousands more with those same weapons.

President Bush and members of his Cabinet point out that not only does Hussein continue to develop and hide weapons of mass destruction, but he also is capable of providing them to terrorist organizations like Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda and many others committed to waging a religious war against Christians and Jews. Osama bin Laden, in his last alleged recorded message to the world, stated that the U.S. must convert to Islam to avoid further terrorism.

In the years before World War II, the leaders of France and Britain tried to save themselves by sacrificing Czechoslovakia to the Nazis. We now know there were some in high places prepared to sacrifice Poland as well.

The world was lucky that King Edward VIII (the Duke of Windsor) was forced to abdicate. With war clouds gathering over Europe, the duke and his wife-to-be, Wallis Simpson, left England and went to Germany to, as Mrs. Simpson said, “be entertained by Herr Hitler.”

An unforgettable image is that of Edward giving the Nazi salute on one of his trips to Germany. Meanwhile, while Hitler’s legions occupied Europe, millions of American isolationists cried out against U.S. involvement in Europe’s affairs.

History is now repeating itself. Once again appeasers, isolationists and others who believe in peace at any price are marching. In opposing military action against Iraq, some say that the destruction of al-Qaeda should be first on the U.S. agenda.

Of course al-Qaeda needs to be confronted, and we are doing just that. However, the fight against al-Qaeda will go on for many years since, according to U.S. security reports, al-Qaeda cells exist in 62 countries. Last weekend, according to the New York Times, the Saudi Arabian government said that after a regime change in Iraq, which the Saudis support, it will expel U.S. forces from its soil, bowing to the demands of al-Qaeda.

Fighting al-Qaeda does not mean, however, that we should ignore those like Saddam Hussein, who would arm that terror organization and others with weapons of mass destruction.

Others claim that North Korea, with its demonstrated nuclear capability, should be first on our action list. To the countries immediately affected by North Korea’s belligerence – South Korea, China, Russia and Japan – the U.S. should say “It’s your problem to solve,” while we prevent ballistic missiles and nuclear arms shipments from North Korea to other countries.

In a bizarre editorial, Newsday recently objected to reinforcing our military capability in South Korea, urging, in effect, more appeasement. Newsday is wrong. We should not give in to North Korea’s blackmail and acquiesce to its demand that we buy its cooperation, when it has reneged on four earlier agreements.

Indeed, a successful military campaign against Iraq may well rein in North Korea, if its neighbors have been unsuccessful in bringing that country to its senses.

President George W. Bush cogently described the goal of the U.S. and our allies around the world as “mak(ing) no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.” The American people support the president’s objectives, as do a host of governments ranging from a majority in Europe to a majority in the Persian Gulf as well as Turkey, the only Muslim country in NATO.

Incomprehensible and never to be forgotten are the shameful responses of France, Germany and Belgium, three of our NATO allies, who oppose military action against Iraq and have declined to provide assistance to Turkey in advance of an outbreak of hostilities.

Now that the Warsaw Alliance no longer exists, perhaps it is time for the U.S. to re-examine its NATO commitments and enter into new treaties with those countries that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld calls the New Europe.

Edward I. Koch is the former mayor of New York. His commentary for Bloomberg radio is republished here. You can hear his weekly radio show by clicking here.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics:

War on Terrorism

Editor's note:
FREE - 4 Months to NewsMax.com’s Magazine. Check It Out - Get four FREE