A Look at the Goals and Costs and Benefits
of the War with Iraq

It is important for all of us to be clear on the goals of the Iraqi War and how we plan to measure its costs and benefits in the final analysis. It is never too early to think about these key issues.

Let me add at the beginning. This is not a debate about whether I am personally for or against the war with Iraq. The important issue at this point in time is that the war has started, now how should we think about the challenging issues it poses for all of us? My objective is to share some ideas on how to possibly think about this war, including its costs and benefits for those impacted.

This article offers a definition of war and a discussion of the major goals that have been suggested as possible justifications for why we have gone to war. Finally, I offer some thoughts on how to judge our success in this war effort. My review of various media accounts of the war and sustained conversations with family members, friends and colleagues indicate that these same issues are on the minds of many people at this time.

What does war mean? Merriam-Webster says that war is "a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations." The key word here is “declared.” A state of war actually exists only after war has been formally declared. Some would argue that an informal and undeclared state of war has existed in many parts of the world for sometime, especially in the Middle East.

Isn't it interesting that we should turn to something as simple as a dictionary for guidance at an overwhelmingly complex and frightening time such as this? When you think about it, the dictionary is actually a very powerful book. Over the years, people have turned to the dictionary as an authoritative source to find definition and meaning for a wide variety of words and phrases.

Merriam-Webster can provide us with a quite adequate definition of war; that is it can provide us with a widely understood way of referring to war. As I reflect on this issue, I seriously question how much the dictionary, or for that matter any formal information and knowledge source, can tell us what war really means to us in a personal sense. Meaning is always personal. An issue is meaningful to us when it either aligns with or challenges our personal values. In this light, this war with Iraq has and will come to mean many different things to many different people.

On March 19th, President Bush informed all of us that we are formally at war with Iraq; that is we are engaged in “a declared armed and hostile conflict” with Iraq. The war has officially begun. Most people dislike prolonged ambiguity because it makes them feel overwhelmed by the large number of possibilities that could occur in the future. Ambiguity often creates questions that we cannot answer, and therefore causes us to fear our own questions at times. Let me encourage you not to fear your own personal questions about this war with Iraq. Rather, consider exploring these questions in the context of your values. Some rich learning lessons may await you.

Things change in our mind once we are armed with an official declaration of war. We are no longer waiting for war. For some, it brings relief to shrug off the initial phase of ambiguity and uncertainty about whether or when we will actually begin fighting the war with Iraq. For others, the real fear and anguish begins. Imagine the fear that our armed service men and women must feel right now. Imagine the fear that ordinary Iraqi citizens must feel at this moment. The reality of war sets in as we listen to reports of casualties and other developments. War is no longer a theoretical discussion for any of us, least of all the men and women who are actually there fighting.

We follow the events of the Iraqi War in the news on a play-by-play basis, much like we watch Sunday afternoon football. We absorb news reports for what they tell us about the statistics and the strategy of war. We look for whatever evidence we can find that helps us answer the questions about what is the score and who is winning this war. For most of us, the process is a torturous roller-coaster ride that we can hardly wait to end.

What does this war mean to me? I am neither a hawk nor a dove when it comes to war. In the most basic sense, I see war as a last choice alternative when all other strategies fail. Did the United States explore all other options before declaring war? Our official view from Washington is that we did. Much of the rest of the world does not agree. The important issue at this point is what choices or decisions we make about the war effort from this point onward. If we view warfare through the lens of football strategy, then the objective is to play the best offense and defense possible, given the talent playing, the coaches and overall field conditions. By almost all yardsticks, the United States has a superior team, even though we do not have home field advantage. In this case, we clearly prefer to play this game on our opponent’s home field.

As I look back across history, war has been in many cases a necessary evil. My pragmatic side tells me that now we are officially in this war, the central concern is how to we get out with minimal harm and expense to both American and world citizens. Also, I think it is important that when this war is over, we feel on a personal level that we accomplished our goals and that we did the right thing for America and others impacted by the war. This raises the moral question, which in the case of war is often judged in the context of the lesser of evils. There have never been any easy answers in judging the morality of war itself.

It’s important to examine the goals we seek to achieve in this war with Iraq. What are we really trying to accomplish? In my analysis, this is not a simple issue to assess. It is complex because the goals associated with this war are very complicated and are influenced by a myriad of factors, many of which are not under our control. I don’t think it is necessarily bad that we have different goals in undertaking this war, but for most of us it is important that we understand which goals are most important. In this sense, we seek to understand the hierarchy of goals that exists. Let’s look at some of possible goals for this war.

From my standpoint, reducing or eliminating terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction is the top goal we should have in mind in proceeding with this war. 9/11 is impossible for most Americans to shake from their memory. We do not want anything like 9/11 to occur again in the United States or anywhere in the world. This is a fairly widely shared goal, at least by the American public. The mission of the U.N. inspection team was to determine whether and to what degree Iraq possessed these weapons. From the United States’ perspective, the U.N. team results did not prove that such weapons did not exist in Iraq. Much of the rest of the world said that the inspection results were inconclusive and that we should give the U.N. team more time to investigate. As all of us know, the debate ended at this point and we decided to move forward with the war effort.

Now, in the actual face of war, we may really know whether Iraq possesses these weapons. Hopefully they do not. But that raises the question of what happens if Iraq does not use any weapons of mass destruction during this war. First, does that verify that Iraq does not possess these weapons? On the surface, it does not. It may mean that for whatever reason they chose not to use them. Moreover, how will the rest of the world perceive the United States at the end of this war without any concrete evidence that Iraq possesses these weapons? Will they and will we see this war as justified in this case? This is indeed an important question for all to consider.

While the terrorism and weapons of mass destruction issue is vitally important, other criteria will also be used to judge us. Probably the most important yardstick that will be used by others will be the final death toll and the financial and economic costs produced by the war. The casualty count is easier to measure, but how to reasonably ascertain the economic impact of the Iraqi War is far harder. If this is a swift and painless exercise for all concerned, the U.S. will be judged less harshly. Some may actually praise us. If the war effort drags on with little or no positive benefits, we are likely to lose some current international friends and sustain considerable criticism from many fronts.

Can this war provide a 100 percent eradication of terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction? No, but perhaps it can reduce the future prospect of terrorism and the use of these weapons by some significant percentage. In other words, at best we can achieve a substantial reduction in the risk that these events will occur in the future. That raises another important question: how much of a reduction in this threat will be considered sufficient to justify a full-scale war with Iraq? That too is difficult to assess because no one knows the exact size of this threat now, only that we suspect that it is quite large. This is another leading cost-benefit question that we should be asking ourselves as this war proceeds.

Knowing something about North Korea’s nuclear capabilities, we also should be asking the question of whether a successful war with Iraq will substantially deter the North Koreans’ use of nuclear weapons in the future. A failure in Iraq could likely propel the North Koreans and others to move ahead with their weapon plans. Strangely, a big success in Iraq could actually backfire in its impact on the North Koreans by motivating them to speed up their nuclear development efforts because they suspect that they will be the next focus of our attention after Iraq.

And yes, most of us have considered the possibility that terrorist threats may actually grow in retaliation against the Iraqi war effort. What is the probability of this development? At this point, none of us really knows. We are doing what we can to minimize this likelihood. Heightened security worldwide will hopefully help to manage this threat, but the question is how much?

Most of us continue to watch for signs of new terrorist attacks. When you heard about the recent high-jacked Cuban plane, what was your first thought? I would guess many people initially feared this was an attempt at terrorism. When you first learned of the new deadly Asian virus, wasn't the first thought that crossed your mind that biological warfare has begun? When you read in the paper recently that the poison Ricin was found in a Paris subway, what came to mind? It is very easy at a time like this to misjudge situations and prematurely jump to conclusions, especially when we are looking for the enemy to come get us. The lesson for all of us is to judge situations and events very carefully, and seek perspective, which only knowledge, and in some cases time, can provide.

Putting an end to Saddam Hussein and freeing the Iraqi people is another very often-stated goal of this war. Is this an important goal? I think it is. Is it as important as the terrorism goal? It is if the Hussein regime is viewed as a primary source of world terrorism. Some would say the two goals are one and the same. While I see some connections between the two goals, I also think they are different. Besides the terrorism argument, overcoming a repressive and cruel political regime is a frequent reason given for decapitating the current Iraqi regime. It also must be remembered that eliminating Saddam Hussein will remove only one source of this threat, and yes it is suspected to be a big one at that.

Can we actually eliminate Saddam Hussein? Some say this is at best a 50-50 probability. Did we get the job done with Bin Laden? Many suspect that we did not. And yet, control of Afghanistan was returned back to its people. Could the same happen in Iraq? I think that is a distinct possibility if the war effort goes as planned. My guess is that taking out Hussein will be a very difficult task for a variety of reasons. One of which is actually locating him. Also, how good is our intelligence and how effective is our precision weaponry? As best we can tell, we missed on our initial shot. Also, we must ask again how many lives will be lost in the process of trying to eliminate the Hussein regime? Will the targeted war strategy actually work? Most recent news reports tell us that it will not work alone. What does this mean? It may be telling us that we must move quickly to a broader scale assault to get the job done. Most people interpret this to mean much greater bloodshed and destruction in Iraq.

What about freeing the Iraqi people? This sounds like a worthwhile and plausible goal, but again the cost-benefit issue must be answered. How many American and allied soldiers and innocent Iraqi citizens must die to achieve this freedom goal? Moreover, what does freedom mean to the Iraqi people? Do they really see the United States as doing them a favor, or do they see this as a malicious attack upon their culture and religion? My guess is that both views exist among Iraqi citizens. So far, the people of Afghanistan are struggling to find a better life. There has been progress, but most believe this will take some time and probably a lot of help from the United States and other nations for the Afghans to really find their way. Putting Iraq onto the road of recovery and reform after the war is likely to take some time, even with substantial help from the U.S. government. Many uncertainties exist in terms of which political and economic path the Iraqi people will take once liberated.

Is U.S. economic recovery a goal of this war? Bloodshed and mass destruction are bad enough, but economic gain may be viewed by many as the most sinister of our possible goals for this war. We outright deny this as a motive, but many at home and abroad tend to think otherwise. Read the signs of the protestors here and abroad. They invoke the image of the ugly American, consumed by our personal financial gain. More than a few have called this an "oil war." If oil prices drop to less than twenty-four bucks a barrel, OPEC leaders have decided they must hold an emergency meeting to take corrective action. That could mean many things, including price-fixing. In recent days, Wall Street and other world markets have seen some modest gains, which may not last after the initial war euphoria fades. The struggling airlines are growing even more worried as people cancel both personal and business flights until we know more about the war and ensuing events. And finally, how about all are defense contractors? How unhappy are they with their new lucrative contracts with the government?

Our economic security is vitally important, and we should be painfully aware of the short and long term economic impacts of this war effort on the U.S. and global economies. For the economy, the worst of all cases is a prolonged “holding pattern” where consumers and businesses both refuse to spend. In that respect, a declaration of war could actually help loosen spending, which is badly needed to get us back on our feet economically. In the final analysis however, restoring our economy by initiating a war should not be a deliberate goal of this war effort. Let’s hope that it is not.

If this war is like any other war in history, we can count on the fact that our goals will evolve as the war process develops. It is important to see a war in “process” terms. Parts of the process that a war follows are planned and well understood and others are not. We live in a world of unintended consequences. Major unpredictable chain reactions are set off across the world by even simple everyday events. This was will give rise to many unintended consequences. Our next job must be to identify these possibilities. Surprise and unpredictability are regular parts of our lives. It is vitally important that we ask ourselves the right questions about this war effort so we can decide what this war means to each of us in a personal sense. I am reminded of the words of a kindred spirit here in Cleveland, Jack Ricchuito, who says that “our questions give shape to our life.” So, go ahead and ask your most burning questions about this war and see where they lead you. That is precisely what I am doing here.

In the final analysis, how do we really know if we have won this war? How do we define success in this case, and for whom? Most certainly success will not be defined in terms of 100 percent solutions to any problem. That is simply not possible. We are already experiencing losses, which says to me this game will not be a shutout victory by any stretch. Like most of us, I hope we can clinch this one early in the game so everyone can go home and get back to their “normal” lives.

I think our nation’s goals will ultimately tell the story of whether we were successful in this war. Then again, maybe our goals will not at all tell the story of our success. Instead, it will simply come down to how we decide to tell our story, regardless of what the scoreboard says at the end of the game. Sadly, the spin-masters will have their say when it comes to writing the final chapter on the story of the Iraqi War.

The eyes of the world are fixed on America and this war effort. How will they judge the outcomes of this war? Most other nations have spoken by their inaction that this is not their war. How will the rest of the world feel about us if we win or lose this war? How will we as Americans feel about the rest of the world after this war is behind us? These are the questions we should be asking ourselves even now early in this game.

Contact Information:
Don Iannone, Editor, ED Futures
Phone: 440.449.0753
Email: dtia@ix.netcom.com