Tue, 16 Sep 2003

UN support would boost troops' cause

The Korea Herald, Asia News Network, Seoul

After half a year, the nation is again about to be divided acutely over sending troops to Iraq -this time most probably for combat missions instead of just engineers and medical personnel. The administration has been cautiously sounding out public opinion since the United States allegedly requested earlier this month that Seoul dispatch additional troops to help keep peace in the Middle East nation.

South Korea is not the only ally reacting cautiously to U.S. President George W. Bush's call for international assistance in Washington's postwar security and rehabilitation efforts in Iraq. Britain responded immediately that it would rush over another 12,000 troops to augment the 10,000 troops currently serving in the war-torn country.

But France and Germany, the two major European opponents of America's war with Iraq, are both lukewarm. Even Japan and Australia are not as enthusiastic as they once were about committing support.

President Roh Moo-hyun appears to have no other option than to comply with Bush's request -- making the same realistic choice that he did six months ago. It may have little to do with his personal view of the U.S.-led invasion and the role of foreign forces in the debilitated nation since the war officially ended in early May.

As some of his closest sympathizers in the National Assembly have already voiced strong objection to an additional troop dispatch, one easily assumes that Roh may not approve of a war whose morality is unfounded, not to mention the danger that continuing armed hostilities in post-Saddam Iraq pose.

However, the president must remember that the nation cannot endure more conflict arising from divided opinion on a vital issue. People have suffered more than enough from the emotional arguments and violent protests that ensued in various sectors of society since the Roh administration was launched in February. This time, therefore, the president would be wise to explain articulately why the nation must send more young men and women to a dangerous land. He had better ask for a straight approval from the people and the National Assembly, rather than being wishy- washy and confusing everyone.

The procedure could be simpler this time because all the reasons have been expounded. North Korea is a double-pronged factor again. Smooth policy coordination with Washington is essential for a peaceful settlement of the current security crisis on the peninsula deriving from the North's nuclear ambition. At the same time, many people worry, with good reason, that the nation's anti-war posture will be undermined if it participates in an armed conflict with a suspicious goal -- in no country other than Iraq, on par with the North in Bush's monochrome ethic of good or evil.

If the Bush administration wants foreign assistance, it must fulfill an optimum condition by winning the UN Security Council's support. Even more desirably, Washington may well relinquish its central political role and place the multinational forces under UN command so they can oversee the return of Iraq to its people at the earliest possible date. Thus, the United States will provide the foreign troops with a far more respectable cause to serve.