Intent on forcing a final United Nations showdown over Iraq, the Bush administration submitted a Security Council resolution Monday authorizing war against Saddam Hussein. France and Germany immediately objected and, with Russia’s support, put forward their proposal for strengthening weapons inspections and establishing new disarmament deadlines.
With no assurance that he can muster the votes needed to pass the new resolution, President Bush challenged the Security Council to stand up to what he says is Iraq’s defiance of repeated disarmament demands and made clear yet again that he would act if the UN would not.
“Is [the UN] going to be a body that means what it says? We certainly hope it does,” Bush told a meeting of the National Governors Association. “But one way or the other, Saddam Hussein, for the sake of peace and for the security of the American people, will be disarmed.”
The push for a new resolution came as the U.S. took another step to line up its forces for a potential invasion of Iraq. The Turkish Cabinet approved the use of its territory to base U.S. troops and create a northern front against Iraq if the crisis comes to war. Turkey’s parliament was expected to endorse the decision as early as Tuesday.
The United States’ 12-paragraph draft UN resolution, co-sponsored by U.S. allies Britain and Spain, tersely declares that Baghdad remains in “material breach” of its obligations to reveal and destroy its programs to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons.
It notes that Iraq “has failed to take the final opportunity afforded it” to avoid the “serious consequences” threatened in last November’s unanimous Security Council resolution commanding Iraq to disarm.
There is no explicit language calling for the use of military force, but the diplomatic code words amounted to the same thing. Bush specified no deadline for the Security Council to act, but administration officials said they expected to press for a vote soon after the next progress report by the two chief weapons inspectors, which is scheduled to be discussed March 7.
“What I can assure you is that there are no deals to be struck here with the Iraqi leadership,” National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said. “There are no deals to be struck here about just a little bit of compliance or a schedule for compliance, or something along those lines. . . . The main thing here is to get everybody focused on bringing this to a conclusion.”
China said it supported the counterproposal by France and Germany, which have galvanized opposition to a U.S.-led war. As permanent Security Council members, France, Russia or China could veto the U.S. resolution.
“While suspicions remain, no evidence has been given that Iraq still possesses weapons of mass destruction or capabilities in this field,” stated the French-authored proposal, which called for extending weapons inspections at least four more months.
Window for invasion
Such an extension would effectively postpone any war until at least autumn. Military experts say the optimal cool-weather window for an invasion closes in April, after which extreme desert heat would sharply diminish the effectiveness of troops forced to fight while wearing chemical-biological protection suits.
“We see no reason in this context to change our logic, which is a logic of peace, and to switch to a logic of war,” French President Jacques Chirac said in Berlin after talks with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.
But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush has “very little hope left” that Hussein will respond to diplomacy and agree to disarm.
“To those who say the inspectors need more time, need more time to do what? To get run around?” Fleischer said.
John Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, recited to the Security Council a list of Iraq’s violations, including an incomplete weapons declaration Baghdad submitted in December, its failure to account for known chemical and biological weaponry, and its refusal to allow scientists to be freely interviewed.
“We now believe that it is abundantly clear that Iraq has refused to disarm and has no intention of doing so,” Negroponte said.
U.S. needs votes
But the administration faces an uphill task in winning over a majority of the 15-member Security Council to that view. At the moment, the United States can count on only four votes–its own and those of Britain, Spain and Bulgaria–while the rest of the council is on record in favor of extending inspections.
The president has said he believes November’s Security Council resolution on Iraq already confers sufficient UN authority to launch a war to disarm Iraq and that he will not be bound by the world body if he believes U.S. security is at risk.
But in the face of growing international opposition to a U.S.-led invasion and this month’s large anti-war protests in major world capitals, the administration hopes that explicit Security Council approval will quiet skeptics and give potential allies political cover.
Mixed reports
Chief weapons inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei have presented a series of mixed reports on the degree of Iraq’s cooperation, exasperating the White House while, in the eyes of many, bolstering the case for more time put forward by France.
The next crucial deadline comes Saturday, by which time Blix has ordered Iraq to begin destroying a class of ballistic missiles that inspectors have determined exceed the flight ranges permitted under previous UN resolutions.
Baghdad has offered mixed signals so far as to whether it intends to comply with that demand, which would further cripple its potential defenses in the event of a U.S.-led invasion. But the missile issue could cut both ways at the Security Council: An Iraqi refusal to destroy the weapons would boost the U.S. argument about Iraqi defiance, while submission to the demand would be seized upon by war opponents as further evidence of Iraq’s cooperation.
Maneuvering ahead of that possibility, the White House argued Monday that even if Hussein were to begin destroying the missiles, he still has failed to account for large quantities of other toxins, such as VX nerve gas and anthrax.
“We expect that Saddam Hussein will destroy those missiles,” Fleischer said. But, he added, “that would just be the tip of the iceberg. And the reason for that is, as a criminal holds a gun to your head and takes one bullet out of the chamber, you still have to worry about all the rest of the bullets in the chamber, because they can kill you too.”
– – –
Key dates in Iraq crisis
The U.S. and Britain on Monday introduced a new resolution declaring that Saddam Hussein must face the consequences for not disarming. Several dates over the next two weeks may dictate action on Iraq.
Tuesday, Feb. 25: Turkey’s parliament may vote on whether to allow U.S. troops to use bases for a potential attack on Iraq from the north.
March 1: UN inspectors’ quarterly report due to Security Council.
Deadline for Iraq to begin destroying dozens of Al Samoud-2 missiles capable of reaching beyond the Unmandated 93-mile limit.
March 7: Inspections chief Hans Blix is scheduled to brief the Security Council on the inspectors’ quarterly report.
Sources: United Nations, news reports
Chicago Tribune
