LEAD STORY
6 Reasons While the U.S. sends more men and matériel to the Gulf, most of America's allies say Bush should slow the war machine down

Pressure Cooker
For Turkey's new leaders, war could split the government from the peoplep

Inside Davos
Mistrust of the U.S. is high on the agenda this year

Table of Contents
The complete list of stories from the Feb 3, 2003, issue of TIME magazine

Subscribe to TIME

Saddam Hussein A Week in Hell At the precipice of war, facing mutiny at home, Tony Blair stays cool
   
Students read Lysistrata Taking a Stand on Stage This season there's no avoiding the theater of war
   
Saddam Hussein Don't Oust Saddam U.S. diplomat warns his former bosses
   
U.S. troops Room to Turn? Turkey's parliament may still allow in U.S. troops
   
Tony Blair Conflicted George Bush's European allies swim against antiwar opinion
Romanian Support Family Feud France urges new Europeans to toe the old line
TIME Europe, Feb. 24, 2003 French Resistance Chirac says non to U.S. plans for a war to disarm Iraq
War Torn The new gulf between European. leaders and their people

6 Reasons America's allies want Bush to slow down the war machine

Mad at America Can the Transatlatic alliance survive?

Collision Course Germany attacks the U.S. line on Iraq

Don't Mention the War
Josef Joffe on Schröder's flirtation with the pacifist lobby

Yankee Stay Home!
The U.S. gears up for war on Iraq, but Europeans may not follow

America's Anxious Allies
An atlas of
opinions about
going to war



Why do Europeans attack President Bush's line on war with Iraq?

They doubt Saddam is a danger
They don't want Iraqis to die
They fear war may spread
They think war will hit efforts to beat terror
They suspect Bush's motives
They've forgotten the lesson of history
They're jealous of America

NOTE: This is an unscientific, informal survey for the interest and enjoyment of TIME.com users and may not be indicative of popular opinion.



E-mail your letter to the editor


PATRICK KOVARIK/AFP
NOT SO FAST: Schröder, left, and Chirac say Bush is rushing toward war



So most Europeans want to be shown a fresh, momentous piece of evidence before they'll back a war. When they hear Bush make accusation after accusation, when they hear repeated avowals that the U.S. has "very convincing evidence," they wonder why the Administration has not offered that proof in public. They aren't satisfied with the explanation that if the classified info were revealed, it would harm America's intelligence-gathering capability. "For me it's simple," says Eric Platel, a 34-year-old French computer systems manager who describes himself as conservative. "If Bush has evidence Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, he presents it. When the Americans say they have proof of something but refuse to show you, they make a lot of people suspicious."

A startling number of Europeans (75% of the French and 54% of the Germans) suspect Bush of crasser motives: he wants U.S. control of Iraq's oil, he wants a quick war to enhance his re-election prospects in 2004, he wants to avenge his dad. Saddam may be menacing, but if his capability to make trouble isn't visible, conclude Europeans, the Bush Administration hasn't made a persuasive case for military action. In the words of one U.S. diplomat in Europe, "the battle for European public opinion has been lost," though he hopes that a smoking gun or two could at least stop the rot.

CAN'T THE INSPECTIONS GO ON FOR LONGER?
Many Europeans recoiled last week when Bush declared his patience had run out and judged the inspections a failure even before the U.N. received its first formal report. "This business about more time, how much time do we need," said the President, "to see clearly that [Saddam's] not disarming?" Yet the French contend the simple presence of inspectors has effectively frozen Saddam's programs and that kind of containment is better than war.

The U.N. search has only been going on for two months and Europeans across the continent say: give it more time. France, Germany, Russia and China have all publicly and privately urged Bush to slow down. With the exception of the U.S., every one of the 15 members of the Security Council wants inspections to continue beyond this week's report, says a Council diplomat. Even the staunchly supportive British are not eager to fight soon. While dutifully repeating Washington's "weeks not months" mantra about the end of inspections, a British official admits "we need to give [chief inspector Hans] Blix the time he needs."

At issue is not just whether the inspectors have had a fair shot in two months at uncovering the suspect weapons or verifying they are gone. It's whether the whole U.N. process feels legitimate or like a sham. While the Bush Administration contends it needs no more reason for war, it engaged in inspections diplomacy in order to give potential allies a way to join up on their own terms. Washington is now seen as wiggling out of its commitment.

European governments want to be able to persuade the world, especially the Muslim part, that all other options were exhausted before force was used. And they need the cover of an inspections process broadly deemed genuine, if they are to lead their reluctant populations into war. "If people have the impression that going the multilateral U.N. way was only a tactic and Bush's decision has already been taken," says Friedbert Pflüger, foreign affairs spokesman for Germany's opposition Christian Democratic Union, "there will be a problem in Europe." Large numbers of Europeans believe the timetable for war is driven not by Iraq's behavior but by the U.S. desire to attack before Iraq's desert weather heats up to make warfare more difficult.

THE U.N. MUST BE THE ONE TO AUTHORIZE WAR
Back in November, when the u.s. squeezed out unanimous approval for Resolution 1441 reinstating inspections, the language specified "serious consequences" if Iraq were to be found in material breach of its terms. Ever since, the U.S. has insisted it needs no further U.N. vote to march on Baghdad when it sees fit. But for Europe, the key to the whole diplomatic enterprise is to keep the U.S. under the U.N. umbrella. Aides to British Prime Minister Tony Blair say he wants to wring a U.S. commitment for a second resolution from Bush when they meet at Camp David this week. Even in the most pro-war country, Britain, 77% of the citizens in one survey said they would oppose joining a U.S.-led war without a U.N. blessing.



Get the Magazine — Try 4 Issues Free!

Sign up for the World Watch newsletter




E U R O P E
Concerted Crackdown: Police raids show that security cooperation is working — and the danger of terrorist attack is real

B U S I N E S S
Fiat: Will the death of the company's patriarch improve its fortunes?
H E A L T H
Double Dose: Thalidomide makes a comeback, as a cancer treatment

F A S H I O N
Paris Plays It Safe: In an uncertain world, haute couture designers rely on the predictable


ADVERTISEMENT


FROM THE FEB. 3, 2003, ISSUE OF TIME MAGAZINE; POSTED SUNDAY, JAN. 26, 2003

 © 2003 Time Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
FAQ | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use