Christopher Gelpi is associate professor of political science at Duke.

The greater threat to America stems not from Saddam Hussein, but from the consequences of American military action without explicit authorization from the UN Security Council.

In his recent press conference, President Bush articulated three separate justifications for an American attack on Iraq: 1) Iraq is a threat to the United States, 2) Iraq is a threat to its neighbors, and 3) Iraq is in violation of UN resolutions.

First, the president argues that Iraq is a threat to the United States because of its connection to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Yet the Bush administration has not produced any evidence of substantial cooperation between Hussein and al-Qaeda. The most that Bush has been able to demonstrate is that al-Qaeda operatives have passed through Baghdad without being apprehended. If such passive accession to the movement of possible terrorists counts as association with al-Qaeda, then the list of countries the United States will need to attack is a very long one.

Absent evidence that Iraq is cooperating with al-Qaeda, it is difficult to understand the president's claim that Iraq is a threat to the United States. After all, Iraq has no weapons capable of striking America.

Second, Bush also claimed that Iraq is a threat to its neighbors. Given Hussein's history of invading his neighbors, this claim seems quite credible. But the president has not articulated a persuasive reason that Hussein cannot be deterred from such attacks by the existing American military presence in the Persian Gulf. Members of the Bush administration have claimed that Saddam is irrational and undeterrable, but Hussein has been contained for more than a decade. Why is this policy now unworkable?

Third, the president has argued that Iraq is not complying with UN resolutions. It is true that substantial questions and problems remain regarding Iraqi chemical and biological weapons. But the evidence is not as clear as Bush suggests. The central issue concerns accounting for the chemical and biological weapons that Iraq possessed at the end of the Gulf War in 1991. Iraq has not provided documentation of the destruction of those weapons. But in 1995, Kamel Hussein, an Iraqi defector and Saddam's brother in law, testified to UN inspectors that Iraq destroyed the weapons in question. This claim is important because Kamel Hussein is generally regarded by the United States as a credible witness on other issues.Moreover, other aspects of Kamel Hussein's testimony -- such as the hiding of Iraqi blueprints and computers in scientists' houses -- have been corroborated. Thus the possibility that Iraq actually destroyed its chemical and biological arsenals in 1991 must be taken seriously.

Clearly, Iraq cannot be given a clean bill of health, but given the progress that has been made by recent UN inspections and the lack of certainty regarding Iraq's chemical and biological arsenal, it is difficult to understand why Bush believes that a multilateral process of inspections must be abandoned in favor of unsanctioned military action.

Ironically, the greater threat to American security is not Saddam Hussein, but the consequences of attacking Iraq without explicit UN sanction. America's unparalleled power has raised concerns -- even among our closest friends -- that this power be used responsibly. By choosing to use American power in a way that most countries across the world view as impatient and irresponsible, the Bush administration is likely to increase distrust in American policies around the world. Such distrust threatens to undermine cooperation against the real threat to the American people: al-Qaeda.

Attacking Iraq will also provoke more conflict with our enemies. Al-Qaedawill undoubtedly capitalize on the antipathy toward to United States by increasing their recruiting efforts and increasing their efforts to attack the American people. Moreover, we have already begun to see the backlash of the Bush administration's Iraq policy in the recent crisis in North Korea. Bush's "axis of evil" speech, combined with his determination to attack Iraq, led North Korea to resume its nuclear weapons program. The North Koreans have made it clear that they will only dismantle that program in exchange for a direct American promise not to attack them. Continued

American disregard for the will of the international community seems likely to provoke similar efforts to deter and constrain the U.S.

President Bush must be given credit for pushing the UN to address Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, but his apparent willingness to abandon the UN when it does not immediately bend to his will threatens to undermine the security of the American people.

This article originally appeared in the March 13 (Raleigh) News and Observer.