With the United States' war push, people are concerned about the political impact the war will bring to the international community.

The authority of the United Nations (UN) has been weakened by the US strike.

In his speech to the UN Security Council in September, US President George W. Bush showed that the United States would solve the Iraqi issue through the UN.

However, shortly after the Security Council approved Resolution 1441, the United States began a large-scale military build-up around Iraq. This demonstrated the double purposes of the US diplomatic efforts, namely to gain more time for its military preparations and to get UN authorization for its military action.

When it had completed its military preparation, the United States demanded a new Security Council resolution to authorize its war.

Facing firm opposition from the majority of the Security Council, it bypassed the UN and started the war.

In fact, on the demand of the UN, Iraq had already begun to disarm itself. But it still could not avert the war.

The UN has been embarrassed and its authority is at stake as it could do nothing to avoid the conflict. The actions of the United States have also intensified the contradiction and divergence between itself and its allies.

The US-led alliance system could change after the war. After World War II, facing a threat from the former Soviet Union, European countries willingly joined the West camp led by the United States. But more recently, although the United States is waging a war against Iraq with the excuse of fighting terrorism, it shows no convincing evidence that proves Iraq is connected with terrorist organizations.

After the war started, France and Germany, which were two firm Cold-War allies of the United States, did not express their intention to help. In contrast, Poland, Bulgaria and other countries from the former Eastern European camp sided with the United States.

This has an impact on relations between the United States and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries.

With the entry of more pro-US Eastern European nations, NATO's internal order becomes further complicated.

Russia has been trying to hold identical views with the United States on major security issues, seeking integration into the West. But regarding the Iraqi issue, Russia has followed France and thrown a wet blanket over the warming Russia-US relations.

Iraq's strength cannot be compared with that of the United States.

If the war develops smoothly, the US "nation re-building" theory will be enhanced.

In the aftermath of the September 11, Washington realized that its national security is connected with international security.

Although war, starvation, religious conflicts and racial massacre in Africa, Afghanistan and the Middle East seems remote, the collapse of these nations' internal orders could propel the growth of terrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

This has immediate influence upon the security of the United States.

Therefore, the United States vows to strike and harness these "out-of-control nations" worldwide to eliminate the hidden peril.

From the US perspective, it had succeeded, after World War II, in transforming Germany and Japan into "democratic" countries, which have become a major force in propping the stability of the West.

And this is a successful example of "nation re-building."

As the United States considers, Iraq would become an example for the Middle East as a stable and prosperous country through "nation re-building." It then would not only export oil but also "democracy."

If the United States wins the war quickly, the Iraqi issue could probably be solved.

But the world may then have to face the "American issue."

(China Daily March 26, 2003)