MOST support for the war on Iraq was, and perhaps is, founded on loathing of Saddam Hussein's vicious regime.

To the war's promoters, President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, Saddam's inhumanity has proved to be something of a Holy Grail. They have milked it for all it is worth since they failed to win public backing for a war to remove the dictator's presumed weapons of mass destruction.

But the idea, central to the Bush-Blair war plan, that, with just a little help from the US and the UK, a thriving democracy will emerge to fill the void left by the removal of Saddam, is beginning to look increasingly unlikely.

In northern Iraq there is the Kurdish problem. Even with his willingness to gas his subjects into submission, Saddam, that world threat, has been unable to bring the Kurd-dominated enclave of his state under his control. The Kurds want their own state. But Turkey has eyes on their territory and has already moved in troops - just for "stability''. Hmmm....

Elsewhere the Shias and Sunnis are rival factions that recall the Hutus and Tutsis of some half-forgotten internecine strife not that long ago. The omens don't look good, not least because "our boys" are not receiving the liberators' welcome our leaders led us, and perhaps them, to expect.

In Afghanistan peace is preserved only by a large US military presence. If that pattern is repeated, Britain could be tied up in Iraq for years, with a heavy bill for "policing", to say nothing of the cost of reconstruction. The direction of public opinion can be predicted.

Meanwhile, what of the weapons of mass destruction, the primary cause of the conflict? If no WMDs are discovered, do you think that's what we will be told? So, WMDs are certain to be found. But will you be able to believe the reports? The answer reflects badly on our democracy. Let's hope the one we intend to set up in Iraq functions better.

The only bright spot is the remarkable opposition to the war by our young people. Unlike we older folk - or most of us - the young are not prepared to stomach the horror of war in the belief that it is inevitable. And while some young people of earlier generations have held similiar ideals, never until now have the young come together to organise their own protests. This is a significant moment, and we should be proud of the young people who have publicly demonstrated their antipathy to war.

On his visit to Britain in 1982 the Pope prayed to "remove war from the human agenda". If it is moving off the agenda of the young there is at least some hope for the future. The child is father of the man.

But to return to the present. If Saddam holds WMDs, how can we be sure that the bombing of Baghdad and the shelling of other cities won't release the spores of, say, anthrax and smallpox? The bombardment suggests to me that the war's promoters don't believe Saddam holds WMDs. And if they do, well, carpet-bombing where they might be stored seems to go a little beyond that Clare Short word "reckless". It looks like the height of madness.

www.thisisthenortheast.co.uk/ features/