NEW YORK -- Should Washington go to war unilaterally, it will put at risk the hard-earned reputation since 1945 of being an essentially peaceful hegemonist that fights only in self-defense -- unlike the former Soviet Union, the expansionist bully that dressed up its aggression in the rhetoric of a universal socialist brotherhood. And what if the United Nations Security Council authorizes war? When the infamous resolution equating Zionism with racism was adopted, it was less a triumph of Arab diplomacy than an indictment of U.N pusillanimity. If the U.N. should be seen to have bent to U.S. will, who will protect U.N. officials against retaliatory attacks?
Since much of the U.S. grievance against Iraq seems to be focused on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program -- and the American anger has precipitated an international crisis through the threat of war -- it is worth examining the impact of 9/11 on nuclear weapons and doctrines and world order.
If by the end of his term, U.S. President Bill Clinton was a reluctant multilateralist, at the start of his term President George W. Bush was a disengaged multilateralist. The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, pushed him into an assertive and aggressive unilateralism with little inclination to make concessions on any front to international concerns.