NEW YORK – The three U.S. diplomats who resigned to
protest the Iraq war say they're glad it ended fairly
quickly but still think the war was unjustified - and
doubt toppling Saddam Hussein has made Americans any
safer from terrorist attacks.
While there's no clear indication the recent suicide
attacks in Saudi Arabia and Morocco were retaliation for
the war, the ex-diplomats worry that the occupation of
Iraq could spur similar assaults on U.S. targets -
particularly if order isn't restored soon.
"The longer we stay, and the more that people say the
new Iraqi government is a lackey of the U.S., the more
dangerous it is for Americans," said Mary Ann Wright,
57, the former deputy chief of mission at U.S. embassies
in Sierra Leone, Afghanistan and Mongolia.
Wright, also a former Army colonel, quit March 19,
after resignations by John Brady Kiesling, the former
political counselor at the U.S. Embassy in Athens, and
John Brown, who spent most of his 22 years with the
Foreign Service in Europe and Russia.
In resignation letters to Secretary of State Colin
Powell, all three said they found the Bush
administration's case for war unconvincing and its
approach toward other countries condescending.
The war, they said, would hurt U.S. interests, and
they haven't changed their views.
"I'm convinced that we've increased the likelihood of
terrorist attacks," said Kiesling, 45, who asked in his
letter to Powell if the administration had adopted as
its motto a phrase by Roman Emperor Caligula: "Let them
hate as long as they fear."
President George W. Bush has said that by toppling
Saddam, the coalition has removed an al-Qaida ally and
cut off a source of funding and weapons for terrorists.
And American officials have stressed that the
coalition will withdraw from Iraq after a government
that represents the Iraqi people is set up, but they
have refused to put a timetable on the occupation.
Brown says he still views the Iraq war as a diversion
from the war on terrorism.
"I'm glad there weren't more casualties, but I'm
still not sure where the war fits in with our national
priorities," said Brown.
In keeping with its normal policy on personnel
matters, the State Department had no comment on the
resignations.
Danielle Pletka, a Middle East expert at the American
Enterprise Institute, disagreed sharply with the
diplomats' criticisms, arguing that their opposition to
the war implied it was acceptable to leave Saddam in
power.
"That's reprehensible from a foreign-policy
standpoint and a moral standpoint," Pletka said.
Saddam's removal "will not only make Americans safer,
it'll make Iraqis safer."
Brown, Kiesling and Wright said they're not
apologists for Saddam, whom they described as a brutal
dictator.
They believe the invasion was unjustified because
they doubt Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United
States. Using pre-emptive military force to topple
Saddam's regime will hurt American interests over the
long haul - and could be used by others to justify
attacks on the United States, they say.
"Going into another country for regime change opens
the box wide open for other people to use that rationale
for whatever they feel they need to do for their
national interests," Wright said.