|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Iraq: Chief U.N. Weapons Inspectors to Brief U.S. President The leaders of the U.N. weapons inspections teams today are expected to brief U.S. President George W. Bush and other senior White House officials on their views of the U.S. draft Security Council resolution on Iraq (see GSN, Oct. 29). Chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, are scheduled to brief Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (Reuters/MSNBC News, Oct. 30). “It’s to consult on a way forward,” a U.S. official said describing Blix and ElBaradei’s visit. “Blix is going to be the guy on the spot. He’s going to be the guy who has to put a team together and take them in.” Blix and ElBaradei’s visit to Washington indicates that the United States is becoming increasingly serious about returning inspectors to Iraq, a U.N. official said. A U.S. official, however, has said the Bush administration has always supported inspections (CNN.com, Oct. 30). U.N. Debate The Security Council began closed-door consultations this morning on the preambular paragraphs of the U.S. draft resolution. Since none of the contentious phrases, such as “material breach,” appear in these 14 introductory paragraphs, council diplomats said most of the discussion is likely to center around the desire of some states to remove from the text any references to issues other than weapons inspections, such as terrorism and the return of Kuwaiti property. One council diplomat said this morning that there is a “positive outlook” about coming to a conclusion, but “that’s not necessarily to say that we think it will all be signed and settled today or even this week.” (Jim Wurst, GSN, Oct. 30). In the background, the United States and France appear to be closer to reaching a compromise on the more substantive issues, according to BBC News. The two countries have discussed a proposal that calls for a single resolution outlining a new inspections regime for Iraq. If Iraq then fails to comply, the United States has agreed to consult the Security Council before taking military action, BBC News reported. The United States still does not support, however, the need for a second U.N. resolution authorizing an attack. While the United States would be involved in the discussions on a second resolution, it would not be bound by it, according to BBC News. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said the compromise has made him optimistic of reaching a final solution on the new resolution. “I know that the progress has been slow, for sure, but it has genuinely been constructive. And I think that the final outcome will be a good one,” Straw said (BBC News, Oct. 30). Debating U.S. Influence Some analysts have said the U.N. debate over a new resolution on Iraq, which has continued for seven weeks, is part of a larger conflict over projection and containment of U.S. power, according to the Washington Post. So far, the U.N. debate has done little to calm international concerns that the Bush administration is only trying to obtain a justification for war, the Post reported. Because the United States has rejected several international agreements since Bush came to office, U.S. allies have become increasingly cynical about U.S. motivations for now going to the United Nations to resolve the Iraq issue, according to U.N. diplomats. “The whole debate is about two issues,” said an envoy from one of the five permanent Security Council members. “One is Iraq. The other is U.S. power in the world. The second issue is the bigger part of the debate.” Within the Security Council, distrust has been growing on both sides of the issue, diplomats said. Many of the proposals made by France and Russia — which also opposes military action against Iraq — have been an attempt to force the United States to seek U.N. approval before attacking Iraq (see GSN, Oct. 25). French President Jacques Chirac has said war can only be used in self-defense or with international support. “In the modern world, the use of force should only be a last, and exceptional, resort,” Chirac said before a recent meeting of French-speaking countries in Beirut, Lebanon. “It should only be allowed in the case of legitimate defense, or by decision of the competent international authorities. Whether we are talking about making Iraq adhere to its obligations, relaunching the Israeli-Palestinian peace process or solving conflicts in Africa, the same logic of legitimacy has to inspire all of us, because only this firmly guards us against temptations of adventure.” U.S. officials have warned that if Iraq fails to comply with the new inspections, there would still be weak international support for military action. To counter this, the Bush administration has sought a resolution that would force other countries to accept a potential military solution, they said. “This is why words are so critical and important now,” said Ivo Daalder, a Brookings Institution fellow who served on the National Security Council staff in the Clinton administration. “It is clear that some of our closest friends, like the French, don’t trust us” (Kessler/Pincus, Washington Post, Oct. 30). Watching the Inspectors Iraq yesterday called for independent media personnel and individuals to accompany U.N. weapons inspectors once they return to Iraq. Without the presence of neutral observers, the United States will use the inspections as justification for war, Iraq said. “We will not allow the inspectors to be the sole source (of information) because we don’t trust them,” Iraqi Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan said. “We want the inspectors to work clearly under light and I think this won’t annoy anyone but it would rather facilitate their task to look for weapons of mass destruction.” The United States has rejected Iraq’s demand, according to the Beirut Daily Star. “On the Iraqi call for observers for the inspectors, once again Iraq is attaching conditions to something in which they should have no say,” White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. “No matter how meritorious the group of journalists that Iraq might have in mind, the point is Iraq, having said unconditional … inspectors are welcome, is now once again attaching conditions” (Mona Ziade, Beirut Daily Star, Oct. 30). Middle East Command Post Meanwhile, a planned U.S. military exercise involves deploying a new command post in the Middle East that could later be used during an attack on Iraq, according to the Washington Times. The “Internal Look” exercise is scheduled to run for 10 days, and some U.S. military personnel may remain in the region once it is completed, U.S. Army Gen. Tommy Franks, head of the U.S. Central Command, said yesterday. The purpose of the exercise is to evaluate Central Command’s abilities to deploy a command-and-control facility at an airbase in Qatar. “Over the last year, Central Command has built a deployable command-and-control capability,” Franks said. “What that actually means is containers of communications gear, very large communications pipes that we’re able to put in the back of an airplane, fly it a long ways, land it on the ground and then set up a command-and-control complex.” Franks said that if the situation in Iraq were to reach a point in which military action became necessary, he believes the United States would receive international support. “My sense is that we have a great many friends, partners and allies who see the situation the same way we do,” he said (Rowan Scarborough, Washington Times, Oct. 30). Iraqi “Dirty Dozen” The Bush administration has begun developing cases against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and other senior Iraqi officials for crimes against humanity if the regime is overthrown, according to U.S. officials (see GSN, Oct. 21). Besides Hussein, other possible Iraqi war criminals include: * Izzat Ibrahim, vice president of the Revolutionary Command Council and deputy supreme commander of the Iraqi military; * Ali Hassan Majid, de facto governor of Kuwait during the Iraqi occupation and known for using chemical weapons against Kurds; * Tariq Aziz, deputy prime minister; * Uday Hussein, the president’s oldest son and commander of the Fedayeen militia; * Qusay Hussein, the president’s second son, head of the Republican Guard and overall commander of the Iraqi security services; * Barzan Ibrahim Tikriti, the president’s half-brother, a presidential adviser and former head of Iraqi intelligence; * Aziz Salih Noman, former governor of occupied Kuwait and former commander of Popular Army in Kuwait; * Watban Ibrahim Hassan, the president’s half-brother, a presidential adviser and former interior minister; * Mohamed Hamza Zubeidi, former deputy prime minister and former head of the Northern Bureau of the Baath Party, Iraq’s ruling political party; * Sabawi Ibrahim Hasan Tikriti, Hussein’s half-brother, former director of Iraqi intelligence and security directorate and * Taha Yassin Ramadan, vice president, commander of the Popular Army and member of the Revolutionary Command Council. Many other Iraqi officials are considered badly tainted by their connections to the Hussein regime and might also face war crimes charges following further investigation, sources said. Two U.S. Defense Department lawyers have been gathering evidence that might be useful to prosecutors, according to U.S. officials. A U.S. State Department-supervised group of about 30 Iraqi exiles and Iraqi-Americans have been developing plans for transitional justice following an overthrow of the Hussein regime, including criminal charges against a larger number of Iraqis. War crimes prosecutions would probably target Hussein and the aforementioned senior Iraqi officials, who have been referred to as the “dirty dozen,” according to the Washington Post. The Bush administration supports trials held in Iraqi courts that would be partially staffed by international judges and lawyers, the Post reported. “We’ll take the lead in setting the tone. From there, it’s hard to say,” said Pierre-Richard Prosper, State’s war crimes ambassador. “We know that Saddam and his dirty dozen are believed to be the leaders responsible for all the atrocities that have occurred there for well over a decade. We know that over 100,000 people have been killed.” There are concerns, however, that by preparing war crimes charges so far in advance, senior Iraqi officials who are facing prosecution will fight harder to remain in power, according to the Post. “You want to get into Iraq the message that you’re not going to kill everybody in the Baath Party,” a U.S. official said (Peter Slevin, Washington Post, Oct. 30). For further information, see: U.N. Resolution 687 (Sanctions Regime) U.N. Resolution 1409 (“Smart Sanctions”) U.S. State Department Fact Sheet on Iraqi Sanctions Revisions
| ||||||||||
Back to top
