Real issues in Iraq desperately need attention

Based on the lead stories in newspapers and on TV news broadcasts, the most important thing we have to worry about right now is whether a claim that Iraq bought uranium from the African nation of Niger was based on faulty intelligence or was the result of a deliberate effort to mislead the world.

President Bush says it was bad intelligence, for which the CIA director has issued a full-blown mea culpa.

Prime Minister Tony Blair of Great Britain says it's neither bad intelligence nor deception. He says it's the truth and says he has the data to back it up.

Therein lie two conundrums. One has to do with a sudden shift in the recent close relations between the United States and Britain. The other involves the time and effort being spent on chasing imaginary hobgoblins instead of focusing on the future of war-ravaged Iraq.

Consider the recent chill developing between Pennsylvania Avenue and Downing Street.

Blair was well aware of the risks he created for his socialist government when he joined ranks with a conservative American president on the Iraq issue. Blair was steadfast in his support and has continued to be an unswerving backer of American interests in postwar Iraq.

But Bush has known for some time what a liability lingering questions and nitpicking about the "16 words" issue could be in next year's presidential showdown. So he decided to end, as best he could, the ranting of Democrats desperate for attention. The president said the CIA screwed up. He said he shouldn't have included these words in his State of the Union message:

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Not so fast, Blair retorted to a frenzied press corps as he made his way to Washington for an official White House visit and what could only be described as a tense get-together for two men who had maintained such a solid front through the Iraq War. The British intelligence was both accurate and reliable, the prime minister said.

Now consider what the world isn't giving much thought to, thanks to this manufactured hubbub.

Postwar Iraq is a reality that won't quickly go away. It doesn't matter if Bush wins by a landslide in November 2004 or if one of many Democratic contenders reclaims the White House. Iraq will still be there.

It's curious that none of the Democrats who so desperately want to be president has offered much of an endgame for Iraq. They aren't bubbling over with strategies to quell civil unrest, restore a working Iraqi military, stimulate business and industry to restart the Iraqi economy, rehabilitate essential services and food supplies, cobble together a working government, address Iraq's monumental debt or rejuvenate Iraq's oil industry, which is the backbone of whatever it is Iraq is about to become.

These are all areas that have occupied coalition forces since the fall of Baghdad. These are the issues that American and Britain have cooperatively sought answers for. The quibbling over intelligence that had so little to do with why Saddam Hussein is no longer in power is threatening to undo the bond between the two powerful allies. It's time to move on and deal with some real problems.