[email@example.com: Re: imperialist shell game]
- ================= Begin forwarded message =================
From: nebukhadhnasar@... (Abdallah Tahhan)
Subject: Re: imperialist shell game
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2002 09:04:46 -0700 (PDT)
Here below is this morning's BBC report on the issue
of America's effort to get UN cover. Please note the
new procedures envisaged in the proposed UN
resolution. They are clearly aimed at provoking some
sort of confrontation, and thereby war. Just imagine
a team of armed "security guards" storming up to a
presidential palace unannounced and trying to walk
inside. Do you think that the President's guards will
Or how about armed guards storming into a mosque
during prayer times. Do you think the masses in the
streets won't be "upset"?
These are virtually guaranteed not only to provoke
"confrontations" with "Iraqi authorities" who can be
said to be "obstructing inspections"; they are also
likely to create street battles that would require
immediate military intervention by the US to "rescue"
its "beleagured team of security guards."
Probably to get Russian support the US will have to
rewrite parts of this resolution, toning them down,
but still the outcome will be virtually the same,
getting an international cover for an American war.
Note also that the resolution begins saying that Iraq
is in violation of its commitments. Thus, if it is
passed, all the UN is theoretically agreeing that Iraq
is an outlaw which is far from proven, (even if it
were a "crime," which it isn't in my book!).
This is how the US is approaching the "UN support"
issue -- writing a new resolution that is much worse
than the existing ones in order to provoke a war which
they can claim is an "international effort." Why
should anyone who opposes war on Iraq endorse any part
of this gangsterism??
Iraq rebuffs new UN draft
Iraq has rejected a proposed new draft resolution
which the United States and Britain want passed by the
United Nations Security Council.
According to diplomats at the UN, the proposed
resolution would give Iraq seven days to accept
unlimited weapons inspections.
A senior US envoy has begun talks with the Russian
foreign minister, aimed at overcoming Moscow's
reservations about the US approach.
The draft is set to be put to the Security Council
next week and winning the Kremlin's support will be
crucial to getting a vote through.
US President George W Bush has also warned in a
national radio address of the threat he says Iraq
Iraqi Vice-President Taha Yassin Ramadan has said any
move that harmed Baghdad would not be accepted.
"The stance from the inspectors has been decided and
any additional procedure that aims at harming Iraq
won't be accepted," he said.
The proposals radically change the inspections process
Under the terms of the draft, if Iraq failed to comply
with any aspect of the resolution's demands, "all
necessary means" could be used against it - a
diplomatic term for military force.
Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz warned the
United States it would face a "fierce war" in which it
would "suffer losses they have never sustained for
Security Council doubts
Of the five veto-wielding permanent members on the
Security Council, the US and UK support the draft
resolution, but Russia, France and China remain to be
US and British diplomats have mounted an intensive
lobbying campaign to try to win the backing of the
other three - so far, with little obvious success.
On Saturday, the US Undersecretary of State Marc
Grossman, accompanied by the political director of the
British Foreign Office Peter Ricketts, began closed
door talks with Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov
The two sides cracked jokes together as they met, but
before the meeting, Mr Ivanov had said there was as
yet "no clear proof" that the Iraqi president had
weapons of mass destruction, adding it would be an
"unforgivable error" to delay the return of
And Mr Grossman appeared to make little headway on
Friday in Paris where President Jacques Chirac said he
continued to support a two-step approach. China is
said to support this stance.
The draft is expected to undergo changes before being
put to a vote and the most intense wrangling is likely
to focus on the use of military force.
The three opponents of the resolution are worried that
the conditions set for Iraq are impossible to meet and
that President Bush could use this as a pretext to
mount a unilateral military attack on Iraq.
On Saturday, Mr Bush said that the danger to the
United States from Iraq was grave and was growing.
In his weekly radio address, he said that the threats
the country faced would only worsen from month to
month, and to ignore them was to encourage them.
He said that when the threats had fully materialised,
it might be too late to protect the United States and
Diplomats released details of the draft resolution on
Friday night though it has not yet officially been
The three-and-a-half page document opens with a
statement that Iraq is already in "material breach" of
UN Security Council resolutions and demands "full,
final and complete destruction" of Iraq's weapons of
The proposed resolution radically changes the weapons
inspections process, which was broken off four years
ago amid accusations that Iraq was obstructing
Before inspections began, Iraq would have to produce
details of any nuclear, chemical, biological or
ballistic arms programmes it might have.
Iraq would have to agree to let UN weapons inspectors
roam freely in their search for weapons of mass
destruction, even allowing them into government
buildings and mosques.
The resolution would also take away the special status
of eight presidential sites.
In negotiations with President Saddam in 1998, UN
Secretary General Kofi Annan agreed to restrict the
inspection of the presidential palaces so spot-checks
could not take place unannounced.
And the practice of assigning an Iraqi guide to the
inspectors would be scrapped. Instead, it is
suggested, they would be accompanied by armed security guards.
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!