Iraqi Move Seen as Effort to Rob U.S. of Support

AP BREAKING NEWS ^ | 9/17/02 | George Gedda

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Rebuffed by the Bush administration, Iraq apparently hopes its offer of unfettered U.N. weapons inspections will generate strong international opposition to the U.S. goal of installing a new regime in Baghdad, by force if necessary.

Iraqi President Saddam Hussein on Monday night invited the inspectors back for the first time since they departed nearly four years ago. Just what that means in practice remained to be worked out, such as whether Saddam would allow the United Nations to inspect his palaces for evidence he has or is trying to develop chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

Saddam's offer is the latest example of a greater Iraqi diplomatic sophistication of late. He has sought to improve relations with his neighbors while simultaneously wooing three of the Security Council's permanent members: Russia, China and France.

President Bush's speech last Thursday to the U.N. General Assembly put the spotlight on Saddam's promises of 12 years ago to disarm - promises the administration says has systematically ignored, imperiling world peace.

Bush seemed to be making headway, finding a number of countries agreeing with his thesis that Saddam was making a mockery of the Security Council by systematically flouting its resolutions calling for Iraq to certify that its weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed.

Saudi Arabia, which said only a month ago that it would not allow U.S. use of Saudi territory for an attack against Iraq, recently reversed itself but only in the event that the Security Council was amenable to the use of force.

Before Monday night, Bush's speech had framed the debate among diplomats here over the Iraqi question. Now, part of the mix will be Saddam's four-paragraph letter to the United Nations that his decision to allow the inspectors' return was taken "to remove any doubts that Iraq still possesses weapons of mass destruction."

Not long after the letter was made public, the White House signaled its strategy, suggesting the Iraqi move had really had changed nothing.

Officials called it "a tactical step by Iraq in hopes of avoiding strong U.N. Security Council action."

The administration seeks three things in a new U.N. resolution: a list of Iraqi violations of previous resolutions; steps Iraq needs to take to comply; and consequences Iraq will face if it does not comply.

U.S. officials least impressed with Saddam's offer of renewed inspections are those most convinced that inspections are not the answer.

Vice President Dick Cheney said in August: "A debate with him (Saddam) over inspectors ... would be an effort by him to obfuscate and delay and avoid having to live up to the accords that he signed at the end of the Gulf War."

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, another critic of inspections, said on Sunday: "Imagine a September 11 with weapons of mass destruction. It's not 3,000; it's tens of thousands of innocent men, women and children."

Many countries, France included, agree with the United States that disarmament of Iraq is a worthy goal. But beyond that, agreement is elusive.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin sounded much like Secretary of State Colin Powell on Monday when he said, "We have one goal, which is the fight against proliferation."

But de Villepin and Powell part ways on the issue of regime change.

"This is not included in the mandate of the United Nations," de Villepin said. "If we begin discussing it, where will it end? It's a totally different process."

AP-ES-09-17-02 0401EDT

[hobbes1]

Lets see what happens when they try to go to the Presidential Palaces.

[Quilla]

I didn't consider the President's speech to the UN as a request for support. On the contrary, it was a methodically laid out indictment of Saddam's actions and the UN's inaction. And I don't recall the President even mentioning future inspections - he demanded disarmament. This delay tactic by Saddam isn't going to fly.

[sam_paine]

What if Mullah Omar had promised to hand over bin Laden in accordance with US demands?? That woulda thrown a wrench in the international public opinion works, I think.

This is a similar situation causing a rain-on-our-parade delay.

I don't know that W really has all these chess moves mapped out, but one thing is fer sure...if and when we do go in to Iraq, we will win, and we will find proof of WMD whether it's there or not!!!

[MedicalMess]

FROM: The United States Commander and Chief

TO: The Iraqi Commander in the Field


NUTS!



No further message...............

[tcostell]

Obscure WWII quotation Bump......

[Mixer]

Yeah look...we already lost the support of France.

[Argus]

But de Villepin and Powell part ways on the issue of regime change. "This is not included in the mandate of the United Nations," de Villepin said. "If we begin discussing it, where will it end? It's a totally different process."

That's why it will be carried out by the US, not the UN.

[goldstategop]

The cheese eating Frogs needed to be rescue twice by us in the last two World Wars. We certainly do part company on the issue of "regime change." The U.N Charter talks about the body being composed of "peace loving" states. Iraq has been far from one and is still lawless in its international conduct. Maybe the French and Russians don't care all that much about the ideals America stands for but we do. And although its politically incorrect to say it, the truth is we have our own version of the "white man's burden." There are still peoples living oppressed in ignorance and darkness. Its our solemn duty to bring the benefits of civilization and freedom to them, whether they want it or not. The charge of our time, the calling of our age is to make the world safe for democracy.

[TaRaRaBoomDeAyGoreLostToday!]

Exactly