McFreedom

I've read a lot of things in the past forty-eight hours that say, essentially, "Wow, this whole Iraq agreeing to inspectors thing really blind-sided Bush, I guess there won't be a war now." Others seem to imply that, should a workable inspection system be put in place, that it would still be unacceptable to Bush, and that we'd go to war, anyway.

I don't think so, on either of these two points. This administration has shown itself quite adept at both controlling debate and doing the unexpected. I think the possible outcomes here are pretty simple to map, and that the Bush team has certainly had the forsight to sit down with a pencil and paper and draw the flowchart. Here's my version of it:

There are two games we are playing, right now. One is with the UN, and one is with Iraq. Our goal is to win both. There are two ways to win with the UN: Either by getting everyone to agree that the UN is irellevent (much like the League of Nations) or by getting the UN to actually enforce the Security Council resolutions. The only way we can lose with the UN is if the UN fails to enforce the Security Council resolutions and yet continues to exist as a body anyone takes seriously. Note that the UN game is not zero-sum; it is possible for both the US and the UN to win this game. In the game with Iraq, the primary victory lies in ensuring that Iraq doesn't have weapons of mass destruction (nuclear, chemical and biological). Secondary victory lies in liberating the people of Iraq; this would be desirable, but if Mr. Hussein stays in power without weapons of mass destruction, we will still have achieved our primary goal. This game is zero-sum; we both may not win (although we both could lose if we fail to keep Iraq from using a weapon of mass destruction on us). As in many games, victory comes from the setup phase - we are trying to arrange our pieces now so that it is not possible for our opponents to win.

Round One: Compliance

The first round includes inspections, but that's not all. Remember, the Iraqis have been ignoring a whole litany of UN Security Council resolutions, including weapons inspections; giving the Iraqi people the money from the oil they sell; and not oppressing the Iraqi people. Even if they allow inspectors unfettered access anywhere (which I doubt), Mr. Hussein clearly will not give his people the money from the oil he sells, nor stop oppressing them, generally.

So, in this first round, I can see three basic outcomes. The first (and least likely) is that he complies with all UN Security Council resolutions. No more weapons of mass destruction, no more oppression of Iraqi people. In all likelyhood, that also means no more Saddam, because without his boot on their necks, the Iraqi people will probably overthrow him. In this outcome, the game is over at round one, no need to continue the decision tree. Go to "Iraq Outcome One" and "UN Outcome One."

The second (and most likely) is that he complies with some UN Security Council resolutions, or tries to appear to comply, in the hopes that some or all of the UN will be fooled into thinking he is in compliance and that no further action is needed, which will force the US to act unilaterily (or, he hopes, not at all). Go to "Round Two."

The final possible outcome to round one (which I believe is only slightly more likely than the first possible outcome - i.e., not very likely at all) is that he clearly fails to comply with UN Security Council resolutions (especially the inspection ones). In this case, I expect that the UN Security Council will authorize force. If Force Is Authorized, Go To "UN Outcome One" and "Round Three." Else, Go To "Round Two."

Round Two: Convinving the UN to Act

The Round is only played if Mr. Hussein puts the UN in a position where the US feels it should act. This round is avoided if Mr. Hussein capitulates completely in Round One, or Mr. Hussein is so abrasive to the UN that there is no question of it acting. I think it highly likely Round Two will be played, and I further think the Bush team has anticipated it and has plans for it. This round is played entirely between the US and the UN (comprised of its members). This is the final round with the UN; after this round, the UN game will be complete.

Without getting into how this round is to be played, there are two possible outcomes from it. Either the UN authorizes the use of force, in which case Go To "UN Outcome One" and "Round Three", or they do not authorize the use of force. If the US remains bound by this decision (highly unlikely given the President's stated intent not to be bound by it, combined with his 70% approval rating), Go To "UN Outcome Two" and "Iraq Outcome Three" If the US ignores this decision (very likely) Go To "UN Outcome Two" and "Round Three".

Round Three: Use of Force in Iraq

This is the final possible round of the Iraq game. On its own or with the UN, in this round, the US (and perhaps friends) will invade Iraq, eliminate weapons of mass destruction, and overthrow Mr. Hussein. While highly unlikely, it is possible that we will fail in this effort, in which case, Go To "Iraq Outcome Three". Much more likely is "Iraq Outcome One".

Iraq Outcome One: Iraq In Compliance; Hussein Ousted

In this outcome, Mr. Hussein is eliminated, as well as the weapons of mass destruction, and Iraq is in compliance with all UN Security Council resolutions. This is an unconditional victory for the US. If the UN ended up in "UN Outcome One," it is an unconditional victory for the UN, as well.

Iraq Outcome Two: Iraq In Compliance; Hussein Remains

In this outcome, Mr. Hussein's Weapons of Mass Destruction are destroyed, and he complies with UN Security Council resolutions on giving oil money to civilians and not persecuting his own people. Until he is overthrown (which I do not believe will be very long if he is not starving and persecuting his people), this is a partial victory for the US. The only way to get to the end point is if Mr. Hussein complies with the UN, so the UN must be in "UN Outcome One" at this time and also has an unconditional victory.

Iraq Outcome Three: Weapons of Mass Destruction Remain; Hussein Remains

This is the least likely of the possible Iraq outcomes; it would require Mr. Hussein to both dupe the UN and for the US to allow the UN to be duped without doing something on its own. This is an unconditional victory for Iraq and an unconditional defeat for the US and the UN; the UN mst be in "UN Outcome Two" at this time.

UN Outcome One: UN Is Involved In Making Iraq Comply With All Security Council Resolutions

This is a "win/win" outcome for the US and the UN: Iraq complies. The US gets what it wants and the UN maintains its relevancy. I believe this to be the most likely UN game outcome. To be in this condition, Iraq must either be in "Outcome One or Outcome Two." This is an unconditional win for the UN and at least a partial victory for the US.

UN Outcome Two: UN Is Not Involved In Making Iraq Comply With All Security Council Resolutions

Whether or not the US decides to act unilaterally (but even more so if it does), this is an unconditional defeat for the UN. At the very least the US, and perhaps much of the rest of the world, will see the UN as being toothless; a League of Nations for a new century. It is a valid question whether the UN would even continue as a going concern if this outcome is reached, or if it does, if the US will still be a member.

Summary

The most likely outcome is "Iraq Outcome One" and "UN Outcome One": An unconditional victory for the US and the UN; an unconditional defeat for Iraq (well, for Mr. Hussein - this would be an unconditional victory for the Iraqi people). We have set up the pieces so that the most rational moves for all players result in our complete victory, and even irrational moves should result in at least a partial victory for us.

Are there cases I've missed? Perhaps. There's obviously a lot of handwaving about how these round will be played; that's not the point. The point is, in most cases you can ask a "yes or no" question ("Will Saddam comply with all UN Security Council Resolutions, or not?"), decide which outcome is more likely, and decide which way the ball will bounce for either one. If the US can set up the deicision tree such that every possible node results in victory, than it's just a matter of execution (no pun intended). I believe we're at that point, now.