Saddam Ñ Don't mess with Texas!
UNITED NATIONS Ñ The UN Security Council has unanimously passed a tough American- sponsored resolution demanding that Iraq disarm or else. The vote came after two months of intense diplomatic wrangling and in the aftermath of major mid-term election gains by President George W. Bush, and an earlier strong bi-partisan U.S. Congressional backing for military action against Iraq. The clear political cause and effect should be noted.
President Bush called the vote Òa final testÓ for Iraq.
Thus after eight weeks of diplomatic dithering in what seemed like a garden maze of semantic and legal contradictions, Washington was finally able to finesse the resolution past the objections of Paris and Moscow. France and Russia feared that two earlier draft resolutions would have given the U.S. an immediate green light for war. Baghdad is confronted with a blunt ultimatum Ñ list your weapons (by December 8th), and then allow unfettered international inspections, or face the military consequences.
LondonÕs Financial Times advised editorially, ÒThe U.S. and U.K. alone would never have won a majority in the Security Council, let alone unanimity, without the intermediation of more skeptical members such as France. Thanks to the French insistence on a two-stage process, with a report back to the Security Council if the UN inspectors deem Iraq to have violated its obligations to reveal all its weapons of mass destruction, the fifteen members were able to support the resolution.Ó
For Saddam this latest line in the sand must appear to be yet another ultimatum Ñ the difference remains that the White House will not take no for an answer and moreover is prepared for exactly the type of shell game and hide and seek tricks Iraq played with earlier rounds of arms inspections.
National Security Advisor Condi Rice, warns Iraq that there will be Òzero toleranceÓ for any breach of the agreement.
As this column stated earlier Saddam faces the truth or the consequences Ñ either provide full disclosure about his weapons of mass destruction or face the military consequences. French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin stated ÒThe ball is now in SaddamÕs court.Ó
Indeed, French diplomats hail the new resolutionÕs text as focusing on Iraqi disarmament and weapons inspections rather than the original U.S. goal of regime change in Baghdad.
Inspectors are due to deploy into Iraq in late November to start an intrusive search policy. In the beginning Saddam may cooperate as to lull suspicions Ñ he may even hand over some suspected material, as to allay fears and try to derail an impending American military buildup in the Gulf. If Saddam appears to blink, thereÕs still significant opinion in the Council which will say, Òwell he complied, and the crises is over.Ó Saddam has been a past master in dividing the Security Council.
John Negroponte, American Ambassador to the UN warned Iraq, Ònon-compliance is no longer an option.Ó
Yet another challenge comes from the size of Iraq--a country the size of California it would appear easy to have hidden major components which will be searched out by a team of at most 100 inspectors.
Saddam still holds some cards. He could easily create a hostage situation with the inspectors, he can use some of his chemical weapons which would cause a far greater psychological shock than military effect, or he may surrender a sufficient number of suspected weapons to possibly salvage his survival.
In the impending showdown with George W. Bush, Saddam stands well warned ÒDonÕt Mess with Texas.Ó
John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense
issues. He writes weekly for World Tribune.com.
See current edition
of
   |
