Supporters of war in Iraq say one result could be the transformation of the region; that is, a U.S. victory could lead to democracies replacing authoritarian regimes. An area of repression and strife could become peaceful and stable.
"This could be a golden opportunity to begin to change the face of the Arab world," says former CIA director James Woolsey.
He refers to the opportunity that would be presented by a U.S. conquest of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. A democracy established in post-war Iraq could spread its influence to other countries now under repressive rule.
As quoted in the Atlantic magazine, Mr. Woolsey notes that in the wake of U.S. and allied victories in World War Two and the Cold War, the number of democracies vastly expanded. Let's add a few more in the Middle East.
That indeed is the policy of U.S. deputy defense secretary Paul Wolfowitz, who, according to The New York Times, considers post-war Iraq a launch pad of democracy and a counterweight to Islamist extremism.
All that would be welcome, says William Galston, professor in the school of public affairs at the University of Maryland. But is it realistic? Can a U.S. occupation in Iraq be as effective as the one in Japan after World War Two? "It is by no means clear that the people of Iraq will receive an American occupation force with open arms. It is certainly not clear that Iraq's neighbors would be eager to cooperate with democracy building. Nor is it clear that there are the institutions and traditions to build on to achieve democratic results any time soon," said Mr. Galston.
Whatever the case, says Professor Galton, regime changing in the region would take a very long time. Are Americans prepared to wait it out?
Why should these quite unyielding regimes respond to American demands asks Stephen Walt, professor of international affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. We cannot assume the Middle Eastern dominoes will fall at our command. "The assumption hinges on the belief that the rest of the Arab world will be so impressed and intimidated by this demonstration of American power that they will simply fall into line and accept whatever we dictate. You cannot disprove that is going to happen, but it requires an awful lot of assumptions and requires a belief in our capacity for massive social engineering that I do not think is historically justified," the professor said.
Don't underestimate what can be done, says U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing," he asked at a Pentagon briefing, "if Iraq were similar to Afghanistan - if a bad regime were thrown out, people were liberated, food could come in, borders could be opened, repression could stop? I mean it would be fabulous."
Gary Schmitt, executive director of the Project for the New American Century, warns not to overestimate the Middle East regimes. "These are basically failed regimes living on borrowed time. Let's give them a timely shove," he said.
He adds that a failed regime does not mean a dispirited people. Liberated from their rulers, they can flourish and prosper. Iraq can set an example. "This is a population that traditionally has been fairly well educated, has not been particularly radical in Islamic terms. There is a huge problem of a civil society that has been partially destroyed over Saddam Hussein's regime. Nevertheless, they have resources both in terms on their people and in terms of the oil obviously that give them a better start than many countries," said Mr. Schmitt.
Mr. Schmitt added that there is already a trend to democracy in the region, as can be seen in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain and Turkey. He believes a timely U.S. presence can speed up this process.
Among the ardent supporters of regime change in the Middle East are the so-called neo-conservatives, who hold positions of importance in the Bush administration. They are concerned with Israeli as well as U.S. security, and some have written policy papers for both countries.
They may have a problem of priorities, says Harvard's Stephen Walt. ?I do not think most of them are particularly shy about the importance they attach to the U-S-Israeli relationship and to Israeli security. And to the extent that powerful Arab countries are a threat to Israel, they would like the United States to do what it can to reduce that threat.? Professor Walt adds that Iraq is considered more of a danger to Israel than to the United States.