Posted by Dan Ewert : 2/24/2003 11:07:00 PM (Archive Link)
The U.S. is again introducing a “final” resolution to the UN Security Council in order to disarm Iraq. Is this necessary? Absolutely not. The language of Resolution 1441 clearly states that Saddam is in material breach of previous resolutions and that serious consequences would follow if he didn’t immediately fall into line. So from a legalistic standpoint, a new resolution isn’t needed. I tend to think that this new effort is more for Tony Blair than anything since British public opinion is strongly opposed to a war not blessed by the UN. I also doubt that all the military pieces are quite yet in place and so Bush is content to go back to the UN once more. I’m hoping that once the armed forces are ready, he won’t hesitate on sending them in because of UN stagnation.

I also find the nature of the draft resolution interesting in that it’s very direct and concise. It doesn’t reiterate Powell’s speech to the Security Council, it doesn’t go into great detail, it just ticks off each of the 17 resolutions passed in the last 12 years and declares Iraq in violation of them all, especially 1441. Then it simply says Saddam has already used (and squandered) his last chance. It almost seems as if the document was meant to be thrown into the faces of the other countries with a mocking question of, “Here’s what he’s done, whatchya gonna do about it?” In other words, it’s a challenge to France, Germany, and Russia, as much as anything else.

Concerning those three countries, they released a memo today that essentially called for more inspectors instead of military action. This is absurd. Resolution 1441 (which you can read here) clearly states the requirement of immediate compliance with all resolutions, for the inspectors’ unfettered access to whatever sites they choose, the ability to freeze all activity around said sites, that Iraq take no hostile actions against any member state acting to uphold any council resolutions, that inspectors will have the “free and unrestricted” use of surveillance aircraft, and that inspectors may question relevant persons without government minders and that these persons and their families may be transported out of Iraq for questioning. Do you see any problems here? Activity isn’t frozen around sites, Iraq fires at aircraft patrolling no-fly zones and that are supporting council resolutions, we have to constantly negotiate the possibility and use of surveillance aircraft, a total of three scientists were interviewed without minders (and at least one was scared spitless Iraq would throw him in a dugeon afterwards), and we can’t take anybody out of Iraq. It’s perfectly obvious for all to see that Iraq is not obeying 1441 and he is, in fact, doing everything possible to hinder inspections. It’s seems that the dictates of the resolution were a guidebook to Saddam on just how to disobey. The inspectors will never find anything that Hussein doesn’t want them to find. More and increased inspections just mean a slight increase in deception and effort on the part of Iraq. More inspectors also means greater security risks… the more people who know a secret, the less chance that it’s still a secret.

One more note on the Franco-Deutch-Russo memo… it contains this line, “The Security Council must step up its efforts to give a real chance to the peaceful settlement of the crisis.” “Give peace a chance,” anybody? Even the diplomats are resorting to platitudes.