The ground campaign in Iraq, while proving dangerous to troops and their support specialists, will eventually prove successful in destroying military resistance to a “regime change.” Few outside Baghdad really question this.

But the war for public opinion in this campaign is far less one-sided, has far more combatants and, in the long run and the big picture, may be far more dangerous to the future of America in the world.

The problem with conducting a war that many people worldwide view as aggressive and unjust is that it puts the burden of proof on the United States to show otherwise. American leaders must show that the country isn’t fighting in pursuit of oil, isn’t fighting with disregard for the Iraqi people, and that it is fighting a genuine threat to the region and the world.

In successful wars of the last century, these issues have not been as problematic; the two World Wars and the Gulf War are prime examples. In less successful endeavors, such as Vietnam, they were. The difference today lies in the fact that much of this war takes place over the airwaves of 24-hour global news networks — an element that can make the war for public opinion a much more secure victory or a much more devastating defeat.

With this in mind, I have put together a scorecard for the opinion war thus far, placing certain aspects in three broad categories: the Good, the Unfortunate and the Stupid.

The Good

-The field reports on the global news networks, particularly in the first days of the war, emphasized the efforts coalition forces were making to ensure the safety of Iraqi civilians and solders who did not want to fight.

Images of American and British medical care for POWs were particularly compelling. Targeted bombing that did not include electricity and water treatment facilities (which were bombed during the first Gulf War) makes it appear the United States has genuine concern for the present and future of Iraqi civilians. No one watching the news knows for sure how much of this apparent concern mirrors reality on the battlefield, but, from a public opinion standpoint, America is putting its best foot forward here.

-Iraqi leaders have not done themselves any favors in this public opinion game. Marching American POWs in front of cameras in an attempt to humiliate them does not win world sympathy, nor does lobbing missiles toward Kuwait City or allowing American troops to stumble upon a suspected chemical weapons plant.

The Unfortunate

-With Iraqi soldiers abandoning their uniforms and fighting as civilians (and some waving white flags before opening fire), the U.S. position gets a lot trickier. The chances of killing truly innocent civilians increases; the odds that coalition soldiers will treat genuine civilians with dignity rather than suspicion decreases; the probability of a tragic event in this war for public opinion jumps dramatically.

-Iraqi fighters are still hiding in the country’s only port, holding up humanitarian aid that was supposed to follow right behind American soldiers. Speeches about the liberation of the Iraqi citizenry become a lot less compelling, at least to Iraqis, the longer such aid is kept away.

-Discovering that a Russian company provided guidance-jamming and night-vision technology to the Iraqi military only complicates a shaky international situation. Eliminating one enemy in Saddam only to make another in Putin is not a good trade off for America; Saddam might have some “weapons of mass destruction,” but Putin has a cash-strapped country that is full of them.

The Stupid

-Coalition soldiers hoisting a U.S. flag over an Iraqi port city on the first day of ground combat had to make American diplomats red-faced. The Bush Administration spent much effort to characterize this as a war for “the liberation of the Iraqi people” while the Iraqis called it imperialist invasion. Putting up an American flag in the city only offered support for the Iraqi position. Luckily, commanding British marine officers yelled at the American troops soon after it went up, and it came down quickly — but the damage was done.

-The Bush Administration should make every effort to keep Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s ass away from the podium. He seems to envision himself as a straight shooter who is proud of America’s military might. To those not predisposed to agree with him (i.e. much of the world), he comes off as arrogant and insensitive — two charges American foreign ministers are definitely trying to avoid validating.

-Talented writer and Vietnam vet Tim O’Brien once wrote that war can be beautiful, but field reporters would be well advised to keep that sentiment to themselves. Some have described the “shock and awe” bombing campaign as if they were watching the Fourth of July fireworks. From a distance it might be accurate, but for those concerned about friends and relatives within Iraq, the explosions are more than Roman candles.

The United States is currently engaged in two wars: at this point, neither can be abandoned, and both must be won. Before American leaders begin proclaiming victory over Saddam Hussein and the Republican Guard, they should take pause: the more difficult war is still undecided.

Matt Lynch ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in English and political science.