There is no answer to the reality that the United States and Britain have won their war on Saddam Hussein and his "jihadists". Deplorable though it was, and doubtful its legitimacy, in the crude calculus of war casualties the death and destruction is far less than envisaged.
Baghdad's fall yesterday to the Anglo-American invasion force, amid moving scenes of jubilation and widespread looting, signals that his regime has collapsed and the three-week war is nearly at an end.
These extraordinary events, witnessed on television screens throughout the world, are a welcome relief for the Iraqi people. They have been spared the ravages of a prolonged street-by-street battle for the capital and are suddenly realising the dictatorship is at an end. While US and British commanders prudently urge caution, saying there may still be a final round of fighting in Tikrit, they are understandably claiming justification for an efficiently fought campaign which used their military technology to the greatest effect.
This rapid military success does not, however, confer automatic political justification for the war. It was launched without explicit authorisation by the United Nations Security Council, in defiance of the council's majority which is an indispensable procedural safeguard set out in the world body's Charter. The ostensible purpose, as claimed in legal documents lodged with the UN, has been to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction, not to change or democratise its regime. The political risks involved in using force unilaterally to achieve both of these objectives remain in place despite the outcome of the war, and the policing of the victory will cost many more lives.
The risks include the danger that Iraq may disintegrate, with incalculable effects on the Middle East region. The uneasy combination of jubilation with spreading disorder and looting in Basra and Baghdad yesterday illustrate these dangers very well, as does the possibility of more intense fighting for the main cities and oilfields in northern Iraq. They could include regional instability and terrorism, driven by the visceral hatred and sense of powerlessness towards the West of the Arab world, evidenced by the ambiguous reactions to the fall of Baghdad throughout the Middle East region.
These are not insurmountable problems. It should be possible to overcome them if the international community unites, not to debate the legitimacy of the war, but rather to insist on its participation in the peace. This can only be done by ensuring the successive stages of military rule, interim administration and elected government are fully endorsed through the United Nations. It would involve the US and Britain acknowledging they need multilateral help to provide humanitarian aid, funds for reconstruction, safeguards for Iraq's oil wealth and a commitment to tackle the festering Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They were all interlinked by Mr Bush and Mr Blair at the Hillsborough summit two days ago.