After a week in the Middle East, Rep. Mike Rogers is convinced the United States should refrain from attacking Iraq.
The Brighton Republican departed last week for the region believing the time was approaching for the United States to take military action. But Wednesday, the day after returning from the fact-finding mission, he told The State News, “Now is not the right time” to attack.
While overseas, the first-term congressman met with intelligence officials in Paris and agents stationed in the Middle East. Rogers also met with both Saudi Arabia’s royal family and Saudi decedents.
His findings showed Iraq is not an imminent threat, but Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is working to acquire weapons of mass destruction. There isn’t enough support from other countries to send more than 200,000 troops to invade Iraq, Rogers said, adding U.S. policy in the region hasn’t been consistent.
“Getting weapons inspectors back in the country would be No. 1,” he said. Rogers said he will be in contact with the White House to shed light on the evolving situation.
The five members of Congress who attended the trip with him are split on what’s next for Iraq, Rogers said. But if President Bush wants war, Congress ultimately will be responsible for making the declaration.
In a Los Angeles Times nationwide poll conducted late last month, 59 percent of 1,372 adult Americans surveyed believe the United States should take military action to remove Saddam from office.
But 61 percent of those saying the United States should militarily remove Saddam from power said the United States should attack only if the international community supports the move.
This was Rogers third trip to the Middle East since joining Congress. He said U.S. officials need to work to bring long-term stability to the troubled region. “I’ve learned a great amount from my trips in the Middle East,” he said. “It is incredibly helpful to come back here to make good decisions in Congress.”
But East Lansing attorney Frank McAlpine, who is campaigning to unseat Rogers in the Nov. 5 congressional election, said one trip isn’t enough to make a decision on going to war with Iraq.
“War is a very blunt instrument, and the final outcome often is different than originally expected,” he said. “You have to get the information from the president from what he proposes, then you need to make a judgment of the ramifications of what any actions would be.”
Although U.S. plans remain unclear, international relations Professor Michael Schechter said some analysts argue U.S. officials have United Nations authority to begin a military assault.
He said the argument stems from Iraq failing to admit weapons inspectors, a mandate implemented after the Gulf War ended a decade ago.
“Most people assume that they don’t yet have nuclear weapons,” Schechter said. “The odds that they have biological and chemical weapons are much greater.”
Schechter said that for members of Congress to decide to deploy of U.S. troops they must gather as much information as they can.
Chad Previch can be reached at previchc@msu.edu.
