Then He'll see brute force.
Posted on 09/11/2002 9:10:08 PM PDT by USA21
Annan Urges No Unilateral Action Against Iraq
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will tell President Bush on Thursday that only the United Nations can sanction the use of force against Iraq.
Annan, without mentioning possible U.S. plans to attack Iraq, says any country can defend itself when attacked.
"But beyond that, when states decide to use force to deal with broader threats to international peace and security, there is no substitute for the unique legitimacy provided by the United Nations," he will tell the U.N. General Assembly, according to prepared remarks.
Annan, who also challenges U.S. policy by renewing a call for an international conference on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, speaks shortly before Bush sets out for the assembly his case for action against Iraq.
Bush is expected to challenge the United Nations to enforce post-Gulf War resolutions demanding Iraq disarm. The United States believes Iraq is developing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
"I'm going to the United Nations to give this speech for a reason, because I believe this is an international problem, and that we must work together to deal with the problem," Bush said on Tuesday.
A U.N. official said Annan's speech was being released early so it would not be overshadowed by Bush's address. A copy of his remarks was given to U.S. officials.
"The more a country makes use of multilateral institutions -- thereby respecting shared values, and accepting the obligations and restraints inherent in those values -- the more others will trust and respect it, and the stronger its chance to exercise true leadership," Annan says.
He says member states had shown they were willing to take actions under the authority of the U.N. Security Council they would not be willing to take without it.
"Even the most powerful countries know that they need to work with others, in multilateral institutions, to achieve their aims," Annan says in a carefully crafted speech.
Many European, Arab and other nations have voiced dismay at a U.S. drive to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and halt his alleged attempts to acquire weapons of mass destruction -- with or without approval by the U.N. Security Council.
>
Annan himself said this month it would be "unwise to attack Iraq" and that it would raise international tensions.
IRAQI DEFIANCE
Annan will tell the General Assembly that Iraq is defying Security Council resolutions, saying the return of U.N. arms inspectors is the "indispensable first step" to assuring the world that Iraq's deadly weapons have been scrapped and toward the suspension and eventual ending of U.N. sanctions.
"If Iraq's defiance continues, the Security Council must face its responsibilities," Annan declares, in a formula that clearly does not rule out U.N.-authorized military action such as that mounted by the U.S.-led coalition that drove Iraqi occupation troops from Kuwait in the 1991 Gulf War.
The Bush administration worked closely with the United Nations to get support for a struggle against terrorism after last year's Sept. 11 attacks on the United States.
But on other issues it has irritated many of its European and other allies by spurning global initiatives such as the Kyoto protocol on greenhouse gases and treaties against biological weapons, nuclear testing and land mines.
It has fiercely opposed the new International Criminal Court, sided with conservative Islamic states on women's health issues and cut off funds to the U.N. Population Fund.
The United States continues to accrue new debts to the world body and is now $1.2 billion in arrears for dues and peacekeeping expenses, despite an agreement in December 2000 from U.N. members to reduce the American contribution.
MIDDLE EAST CONFERENCE
Annan will call for an international conference "without delay" to seek a comprehensive settlement of the Middle East conflict, saying Israel and the Palestinians accept the vision of a two-state solution and an end to terror and to occupation.
"We can reach it only if we move rapidly and in parallel on all fronts," Annan says.
The United States has stopped advocating an international conference that it had proposed, and in a June 24 speech, Bush laid the onus on the Palestinians to change their leadership and halt violence before political progress could be achieved.
On Afghanistan, Annan says President Hamid Karzai's government needs help to extend its authority throughout the country and that donors must honor their aid pledges.
"Otherwise the Afghan people will lose hope -- and desperation, we know, breeds violence," the secretary-general adds.
Thats It Iraq....We are not going to let you go that 12th year in defiance....RMFE
First, it was founded by Traitor-Last-Class Alger Hiss purporting to represent us while operating as an agent of the (late, unlamented) USSR.If those other nations wish actually to unite, they must transform themselves into the United States. Better, they must become the United States; they should apply for admission to the Union. No use re-inventing the wheel . . .The "United" Nations ain't, and never were.
The United States IS what the UN purports to be . . . a coherent grouping of nations, the legitimacy of which destroyed the legitimacy of warfare among them. But it took not only the Constitution but the Civil War to seal that.
It would be treason against the Constitution for a president to irrevocably cede present or future authority over our foreign policy to any other agency than the executive of the United States; foreign policy is exclusively HIS responsibility.
's what socialists are, if you hadn't noticed . . . bigmouthed second-guessers averse to actual responsiblity (how they love to heap scorn on the bottom line!).
Then He'll see brute force.
Funny thing is U.S. Congress will do the same thing.
I would like to see the U.S. withdraw from the UN. Can you imagine the liberal intellectuals screaming about how the world would turn against us? Heck, the world doesn't like us anyway, and the UN is ineffective (at best!!) at countering the hatred directed at the U.S.
I can already see the liberal argument going something like "Well, the world hates us, and without the U.N., they will hate us even more."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.