EASING UP THE PRESSURE ON ROGUE STATES CAUSES WMD ACQUISITION
THE GULF WAR PROVES THAT APPEASEMENT OF SO-CALLED "ROGUE" STATES CAUSES CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS PROLIFERATION
Avigdor Haselkorn, 1999. The continuing storm: Iraq, poisonous weapons and deterrence // hxm
These adverse outcomes have even been recognized by Secretary of State Baker. He wrote: "Much of our planning in this regard [Bush's postwar agenda for the Middle East] was predicated on the assumption that Saddam would not survive in power. When he consolidated his authority in the months after the end of hostilities, much of the agenda's rationale was undermined." Baker's statement could be viewed as indirectly admitting that the inconclusive end to the war triggered negative strategic consequences in the region. In fact, during a subsequent confrontation with Saddam, he confirmed this inference by writing: "Rogue regimes around the world are watching closely. If Saddam fails to comply [and disclose his mass destruction arsenal] and we allow him to escape yet again by simply making more promises, these regimes will conclude correctly that proliferation has won. And they will he emboldened." Baker all but admits that there was a link between America's inaction and Saddam's CB deterrent, at least as far as the perceptions of radical regimes were concerned.
US SIGN OF WEAKNESS AGAINST ROGUES INCREASES RISK OF BIOLOGICAL TERRORISM
The Jerusalem Post 1998 [September 24, 1998) p. 10 // stanescu
Rogue states might doubt its ability to risk nuclear confrontation with an opponent that could incinerate, for starters, the oil fields, and follow with a threat of nuclear or biological terrorism. Dictatorships typically exaggerate the internal divisions and indecisiveness in a democracy, and fail to appreciate its resiliency.
Convinced of US degeneracy (Oh, Lewinsky!) and eventual Western disintegration, they may be tempted to hasten the day by ever more painful probes. The West, unfortunately, seems reluctant to stop the slide down a slippery slope with a resolute show of force. Once it develops a non-conventional deterrent it could challenge the West with impunity. It could then also fulfill its constitutional commitment "to realize the political, economic and cultural unity of Islam" under the banner of Shiite triumphalism, by destroying the heretic Sunni regime in Arabia, whose control of Islam's most holy shrines must be an unacceptable affront to a nation with such a strong pride of race and religion. Iran keeps old scores. It still hates the US for toppling Mussadek's 1953 anti-Western uprising, and vented its fury during the hostage crisis and in the unusual torture inflicted on the captured CIA Beirut chief.
SHOWING A LACK OF RESOLVE IN SOME SANCTIONS DESTROYS THE CREDIBILITY OF OTHER SANCTIONS
Jesse Helms; Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Foreign Affairs January, 1999 / February, 1999; Pg. 2 HEADLINE: What Sanctions Epidemic?; U.S. Business' Curious Crusade //lnu-acs
When sanctions do not work, it is often because the target government doubts our resolve to keep them imposed.