If the United States launches a military operation to oust Saddam Hussein without strong proof that ties him to the Sept. 11 attacks, the coalition of nations assembled by President Bush may unravel, former Secretary of State Warren Christopher told 350 people attending the 22nd annual Bernard Brodie Lecture on the Conditions of Peace on Jan. 23 at Korn Convocation Hall.

Christopher, who served during the Clinton administration, talked about Bush's options after battling Al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan, the president's foreign policy triumphs following Sept. 11 and the unilateral stance he adopted early on in his first eight months in the White House.

"The reality, in my judgment, is that an attack on Iraq would fragment the existing anti-terrorism coalition," Christopher warned, with much of the Muslim world moving to the sidelines or outright opposition. The lecture was sponsored by the Ronald W. Burkle Center for International Relations at UCLA, where Christopher serves on the advisory board.

Instead, Bush should use the coalition to push for the resumption of international inspection of suspected weapon sites. "If Sadam refuses, we should be prepared to take strong and forceful punitive action."

Bush's post-Sept. 11 reliance on international cooperation stands in sharp contrast to the actions of his administration in his first eight months in office. Up until the attacks, the Bush administration had turned its back on at least six international agreements that had been supported by U.S. allies and most of the international community, Christopher noted.

The new administration pulled back from the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that sought to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases; the Small Arms Control Pact; the Biological Weapons Protocol; the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty; the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty; and a treaty to create an international criminal court. It also stood back from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and from continuing talks with North Korea.

"In sum, in the first two-thirds of the year, America stood stubbornly apart from other nations on issue after issue. The United States seemed determined to bend the rest of the world to its will -- and it was not offering much in return," Christopher said.

But Sept. 11 changed all that. To mount military operations in land-locked Afghanistan, the United States needed help -- logistical, moral, military and political. "In America's hour of trauma, none of those leaders reminded him, I am sure, that he had turned a deaf ear when they had sought his help on international treaties. Like an incoming tide obliterating all footprints in the sand, the events of Sept. 11 were so powerful that they blotted out other memories -- at least temporarily," Christopher said.

Bush's success at building an international coalition against terrorism has led to a marked improvement in relations with China and Russia.

"The president put all of his chips on the war on terrorism, and he has played his hand with great skill, making many sound decisions and few mistakes," Christopher said.

But are these changes permanent? Or are they merely expedient to the war on terrorism? So far, there is little evidence that anything has changed beyond the scope of the war, Christopher noted. No progress has been made on the international treaties that were shunned earlier; the United States has offered no help to Argentina, for example; and it is not actively negotiating peace in the Mideast.

But the lessons of the past four months should be clear, Christopher said. "Our experience in Afghanistan should have brought home to us how much we need the cooperation of other nations in the struggle against terrorism and other modern-day threats."