The United States is gaining support among the 10 nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council for its draft resolution on a new inspection regime for Iraq, increasing the possibility that the U.S. draft will receive the nine votes needed for approval, according to today’s Washington Post (see GSN, Oct. 24).

The Mexican Foreign Ministry indicated yesterday that it was more supportive of the U.S. resolution, saying in a statement that the United States is “moving closer to the arguments espoused by Russia, France and Mexico.”

Other Security Council members, such as Colombia, that opposed the 1991 Gulf War have indicated that they will now support the United States, according to the Post (see GSN, Oct. 23).  Colombian Ambassador Alfonso Valdivieso said the U.S. resolution “was getting a little bit more support.”

U.S. President George W. Bush has publicly called on council members to support the U.S. resolution to revise and reinstate U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq.

“You have a choice, United Nations, to keep the peace by showing some backbone.  You can be the United Nations or the League of Nations,” Bush said yesterday.  “If the United Nations won’t deal with him, if he refuses to hear the call for peace, the United States will lead a coalition to disarm [Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein.”

Currently, the White House believes it has support for its draft resolution from the United Kingdom, Bulgaria, Singapore, Norway and Colombia.

John Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, has said Bush and U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell will persuade Mexican President Vicente Fox at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Conference being held in Mexico to formally support the U.S. resolution, diplomatic sources said.  China, another permanent member of the council, is not expected to attempt to block the U.S. resolution. 

U.S. officials have said they can also persuade two of the three African countries on the council — Guinea, Cameroon and Mauritius — to support the U.S. resolution, which would produce the required nine votes.  Ireland is still publicly undecided on the issue and Syria is expected to oppose the U.S. resolution, the Post reported.

France and Russia

France and Russia, two U.N. Security Council permanent members with veto ability, are still publicly opposed to the U.S. resolution (Colum Lynch, Washington Post, Oct. 25).  While the United States publicly said it would attempt to reach a compromise among the five permanent members, the U.S. efforts to gain support among the nonpermanent members could be an attempt to isolate France and Russia.

“There’s impatience that this has gone on too long,” said a Bush administration official.  “The president has said this has to be dealt with in a matter of weeks, not months.  It’s time to bring in the 10, let them have their say, and bring this to a vote.”

“The clock is ticking, so the U.S. is calling their bluff,” said David Malone, president of the International Peace Academy.  “If it requires a vote that isolates the French and the Russians, so be it” (Michael Jordan, Christian Science Monitor, Oct. 25).

Both France and Russia, however, have cautioned against a quick vote on the U.S. resolution, according to the Associated Press.  The full U.N. Security Council is scheduled to review the U.S. resolution paragraph by paragraph and to give all 15 members an opportunity to comment beginning today, said French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte. 

On Monday, U.N. chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed ElBaradei are scheduled to brief council members on their views of the U.S. resolution.

Asked how important Blix’s views are, Levitte replied, “For us, very important.”

Russia also still has some remaining concerns about provisions in the U.S. resolution, Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov said yesterday.

“Russia is also concerned about some provisions in the revised draft which, albeit camouflaged, could be used to justify the use of force against Iraq,” Fedotov was quoted by ITAR-Tass as saying.  “A quick putting of the draft to a vote would be counterproductive” (Edith Lederer, Associated Press/Washington Post, Oct. 25).

U.S. officials increasingly believe France will not attempt to block the U.S. resolution on Iraq, according to the Washington Post (see GSN, Oct. 18).  France, however, met with the nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council yesterday in an attempt to obtain their support for weakening the language of the U.S. resolution (Lynch, Washington Post).

Both France and Russia have introduced their own new initiatives to the U.N. Security Council, diplomats said yesterday.  Diplomats described the French initiative as a “working paper,” whose sections and language could be worked into, or substituted for, language in the U.S. resolution (William Reilly, United Press International, Oct. 25).

The French initiative lacks language that states Iraq is “in material breach” of its obligations under U.N. Resolution 687 which established the Gulf War ceasefire, according to AFX news.  That language could be seen as approval for immediate military action against Iraq, legal experts said. 

The French initiative maintains language saying that Iraq has been warned it could face “serious consequences” for failing to comply with inspections.  That language, however, has been moved to the end of the resolution, following language that says the U.N. Security Council will be called into session if Iraq still fails to comply.  The repositioning of the language indicates that there is no prior U.N. Security Council approval for military action against Iraq, diplomats said (AFX News, Oct. 25).

Russia’s initiative has been labeled a “draft resolution” and could be seen as a competing proposal to the U.S. resolution, according to UPI.  Diplomats said, however, that the Russian initiative might be more of a gesture than anything of substance.

“I think Russia just threw down its marker,” said a Western diplomat.  “They just wanted to show they were in the game.  I don’t think they really expect to table it” (Reilly, UPI).

The Role of Pragmatism

Many of the smaller, nonpermanent members of the U.N. Security Council are likely to ultimately support the U.S. resolution, over competing French and Russian efforts, according to diplomats.

“At the end of the game, this will be a choice for a lot of delegations between realpolitik and an attachment to principle,” said a European diplomat.  “And it’s true that the Americans are better than the French at twisting arms.”

Many U.N. diplomats remember the case of Yemen, which along with only Cuba, voted against the 1990 U.N. resolution authorizing military action against Iraq to force it from Kuwait, according to the Washington Post.  As Yemeni Ambassador Abdalla Saleh Al-Ashtal cast his vote, a U.S. diplomat reportedly said, “That will be the most expensive ‘no’ vote you ever cast.”  Soon after, Saudi Arabia deported thousands of Yemeni workers and the United States cut off $70 million in foreign aid.

“Those who play the game of principle run the risk of winding up on the wrong side,” said another council member from a country that is planning to vote in favor of the U.S. resolution.  “And I don’t think we want to be on the side of Saddam Hussein” (Lynch, Washington Post).

For further information, see:

UNMOVIC

U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime)

U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”)

U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Iraqi Sanctions Revisions

IAEA Iraq Action Team

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP

Back to top