The US, The UN and Iraq

timber, I already accessed that link from your earlier post, but what caught my eye was your statement, "German and French participation has been ongoing including essentially "turnkey" facilities for the production of gasses and of sophisticated electronics." c.i.

Here's a link to a publicly accessible PDF file with Arms Sales info, c.i., and I'm trying to find publicly accessible info regarding other points ... more info to follow, as I find the "Free" sites which host it, partner.

http://projects.sipri.se/armstrade/Tnd_Ind_IRQ_Imps_82-01.pdf



timber

"The United States goes not abroad in search of monsters to destroy. She is a well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own. If the United States took up all foreign affairs, it would become entangled in all the wars of interest and intrigue, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. She might become the dictatress of the world. She would be no longer the ruler of her own soul."

---John Quincy Adams

Now them's some pretty words...

That seems to be less bad than expected:

US Angered Over Reported French-German Plan to Extend Iraq Inspections

Walter, The plan to increase inspectors and troops in Iraq makes the best sense - to me. I hope Germany and France retains the fortitude to delay war for the eventual goal of peace. c.i.

Pdiddie, LOL

Blatham: TAKE PHOTOS!

P Diddie: That's a lovely Adams quote. He knew.

Annan Warns Bush Against Unilateral Attack on Iraq
Sat Feb 8, 2:43 PM ET Add Top Stories - Reuters to My Yahoo!


By Tim McGlone

WILLIAMSBURG, Va. (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites) warned the United States on Saturday against attacking Iraq on its own, arguing collective action under a U.N. umbrella would have greater legitimacy and better odds of success.

Some more about the secret results produced by the British government and highly praised by the USA:

First casualties in the propaganda firefight

Perhaps this thread should be re-named in ..?.. ?

Belgium using veto against NATO moves to protect Turkey
Belgium says it will block any NATO preparatory action to protect Turkey in case of war on Iraq. Foreign Minister Louis Michel said on television the Belgian ambassador to the alliance has been instructed accordingly.
http://www.dw-world.de/english/0,3367,1429_W_775097,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-2389240,00.html

Well, the Franco/Belgian/German op[position won't keep The US from going to war against Iraq if The US decides to ... but it could well be a serious blow to NATO. Monday's developments, particularly revolving around the Blix/Bardei meetings in Baghdad this weekend, will be pivotal. If the major obstacles to The Inspections can be resolved, it does weaken Bush's position, and could result in a bit of dissention among current "On-Board" partners. Feb 14th appears to be a major date to watch.

My current assessment is that Saddam has bought a bit more time.
What is going to be decisive will be substantive Iraqi compliance ... however, I have to say that it does not appear to me thare is any substance to the Iraqi promises. The "Eleventh Hour Negotiations" have a certain air of desperation, and Dr. Blix appears if anything to be perhaps a bit less patient than he has been in the not too distant past.



timber

James Fallows, writing in the current (March) issue of The Atlantic Monthly, reports on his interview of President Bill Clinton in Arkansas late last year. Among many other things, he writes the following.

But Clinton's central judgment was that Bush himself was responsible for the shift away from a threatened unilateral war: "I think President Bush has pretty good political instincts." He raised his eyebrows at this point, so that I would appreciate the significance of this praise. "I think his antennae are sharper than, you know, the Cheny-Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz wing. I think he's got a sense of what the traffic will bear." "It might all be a ruse," Clinton said of the Bush strategy of working through the United Nations. "But it looks legitimate. It looks to me like it's a real straight-up deal. I tried to support the President's speech in Cincinnati [which endorsed the UN approach] as well as his subsequent efforts in the UN. I think changing this resolution [so that it called for tougher inspections] was really smart. Because, I mean, how are the French or Russians going to justify a vote against real inspections in favor of phony inspections?"

He continued, "That's sort of my take on it. I like where this thing is going. It seems -- it feels legitimate. It feels like this is not just another charade, preparing for conflict. If that's true, and the conflict comes, we'll have much broader support and be much closer to where we were in Kosovo." The allied effort in Kosovo is for Clinton and his associates the gold standard of international peacekeeping cooperation. "And that will guarantee a much greater likelihood of success in the aftermath. And if, God forbid, [Saddam] does use or give away any of those weapons, we'll have a more broadly shared responsibility, because everybody else is going to be aware of the risks just like we are."

I mentioned to Clinton that the previous day the conservative pundit and sometime presidential candidate Pat Buchannan had said that George W. Bush had a "look in his eye" that showed he was determined, one way or another, to go to war. "A lot of the liberals think that too," Clinton said. "And I think a part of [Bush] does want to do it."

"If I were one of those guys" -- by which he meant veterans of the first Bush Administration -- "I would feel pretty bad that I got talked into this hundred-hour war [in 1991]. But I've never criticized the Bush Administration for not deposing Saddam Hussein. Because I know the facts. And the facts are that George Bush had to promise not to march on Baghdad to get the Arab support."

"Blix and ElBaradei are to make their next report to the U.N. Security Council on Friday. Their report is expected to be pivotal in determing whether the United States launches military action to disarm Iraq.
"I think we are leaving with a sense of cautious optimism," Elbaradei said. "I see a good beginning and would like to see much more in the coming weeks."
Blix added: "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." "
Blix Hopes Iraq is Ready to Cooperate

You are referring to this, timber?

Yeah, Walter ... I see the core of Blix's sentiment in the quote:

Blix appears less optimistic than Al Baradei, and less optimistic than he has seemed in the past. The issues of overflights and independent interviews are major stumbling blocks, and I see little Iraqi move toward accepting the conditions required. Iraq is essentially attempting to negotiate non-negotiable demands. This is consistent with past Iraqi practice, and indicates to me, and perhaps to Dr. Blix, that Iraq is "Playing Games" as opposed to "Playing Along".

I would suppose the Friday report will be less than glowing, but afford Saddam yet more time to continue as he has been doing since the end of Gulf War I. When pressed to the wall, Iraq "Gives" just enough to be able to cause others to believe, in accordance with their own hopes, that Iraq is "Beginning to cooperate".

From where I sit, Iraq has been "Beginning to cooperate" since 1992. It does not appear to me that Iraq has cooperated in any substantive manner.

I add that I see some good points to the Franco/German "Forced Inspection" proposal, and I would like, but do not expect, to see further exploration of that option undertaken by The US. It would really be no big deal to spraypaint the troop's helmets blue and put them ashore to back up an increased and more intensive, goal-oriented Inspection Force.




timber

An increasingly interesting aspect of this struggle is the evident intent of the U.S. Government to exploit the dominance of France & Germany in EU policy and the somewhat different interests of the Central European nations (excluding, for the moment, Germany, Walter) in this issue and in the matter of confronting tyranny, to isolate France & Germany in their home area. Hard to believe that the timing of the joint letters of the European heads of state, & later foreign ministers, and Rumsfeld's "Old Europe" comment were just coincidence. Will it work in the short run, and what will be its long-term effects? My opinion is that, if the inevitable Iraqi operation is a success, the long term effects for France & Germany will be quite adverse. Surely they are aware of this, and that leads one to contemplate many other issues with respect to long-term strategy.

Did anyone notice the repeated shots of Iraqi MIRAGE fighters undergoing tests for delivery of aerosol biological weapons in Powells presentation to the Security Council ?

I did notice the Iraqi Mirages engaged in aerosol dispersion ... you don't use a fighter-bomber for crop dusting. Much of The Anti-War faction appears not to make the connection between "disarmament" and disarmament.

I also see the escalating rifts in The EU, Nato, and The UN to be critical to the longterm viability and relevance of those institutions. A paradigm shift in Global Politics is under way.



timber

Will the UN have any relevance in the future? Will France, Russia, and China destroy the UN by not living up to UNR1441? Will other tyrant countries play Saddam's game of hide and seek, knowing it pays to do so? Or, are these countries that are back-tracking on UNR1441 making the UN stronger, because it proves to the world that "containment" is better than war? c.i.

Cicerone,

Perhaps equally as interesting is the question, will the nanny states of the UN (France, Germany, Canada, Sweden, etc) ever notice that most of the truly populous states in the world, notably including China, India, Russia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Iran and others also reject their darling programs of expanded (and intrusive) international law -- Kyoto, Law of the Sea, the ICC, etc. It isn't just the United States.

Gosh, could there be another explanation for this besides the tiresome litany of anti-U.S. rhetoric they so assiduously pour out?

george, In every language, it's not population that counts, it's $$$$$. c.i.

Population is a critical element in any analysis. The relationship of population to available resources is a powerful nexus.

France and Germany have a lot to lose if they pick the wrong side. For them to opt for non-allignment is also dangerous. If I read George correctly, we may be seeing the beginning of a shift from large western European leadership, to a new group of emerging eastern European states. Interesting idea, and one that would bear watching.

If the UN proves indecisive over the next few weeks, it is in danger of becoming as irrelevant as the League of Nations.