Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Annan will tell President Bush that only the United Nations can sanction the use of force
Reuters ^ | September 11, 2002 11:03 PM ET | By Alistair Lyon

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.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: unitednations; unitedterrorists
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-131 next last
To: USA21
and GWB will tell him they haven't done shit for 10 years
101 posted on 09/12/2002 4:36:26 AM PDT by The Wizard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Maybe Kofi Annan and Bill Clinton can form a support group for people with delusions of relevance.
102 posted on 09/12/2002 4:44:54 AM PDT by steve-b
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Someone refresh my memory, as it's a bit hazy. Exactly WHERE in the Constitution does it say that the government has to have permission from the UN before it goes to war? Because honestly, I don't remember such a clause.
103 posted on 09/12/2002 5:02:39 AM PDT by Green Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: USA21
If Iraq's defiance continues, the Security Council must face its responsibilities,"

Thats It Iraq....We are not going to let you go that 12th year in defiance....RMFE

104 posted on 09/12/2002 5:33:02 AM PDT by hobbes1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Kofi Annan doesn't have the commen sense or brains to shine GW's boots.......though the thought is refreshing.......
105 posted on 09/12/2002 5:38:48 AM PDT by WyCoKsRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USA21
There are a couple of "dirty little secrets" about the UN:
First, it was founded by Traitor-Last-Class Alger Hiss purporting to represent us while operating as an agent of the (late, unlamented) USSR.

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.

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 . . .
106 posted on 09/12/2002 5:50:04 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USA21
U.S to Koffi Annan: go kiss my ass; we'll save you the trouble and attack first and get your blessing afterwards.
107 posted on 09/12/2002 6:09:30 AM PDT by goldstategop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
Cut off our money to the UN, tell them to leave NYC, and watch how quickly their tune changes. Of course, still follow through on our actions.
108 posted on 09/12/2002 6:12:17 AM PDT by Corporate Law
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: byteback
worse than teenagers
'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!).

109 posted on 09/12/2002 6:15:36 AM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Corporate Law
And stop sending US troops for UN missions, I've got a collection going of expeditionary medals for "UN" operations that we either should have finished the job ourselves ("Operation Southern Watch" comes to mind) or should have never got involved in ("Operation Madeline Albright's War", oops, I mean Kosovo).
110 posted on 09/12/2002 6:17:08 AM PDT by USAF_TSgt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Tell Annin and his merry bag of leaches (the U.N.)to pack their bags and go sit with Saddam while the bombs start to fall!
111 posted on 09/12/2002 6:19:51 AM PDT by leprechaun9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Annan will tell President Bush that only the United Nations can sanction the use of force

And Bush will tell Annan to blow it out his cannon.
112 posted on 09/12/2002 6:22:30 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Vast Right Wing
It is time to ask the UN what the HELL they have done to stop Irag, and why THEY haven't done one damn thing about getting inspectors back in Irag....ONLY the USA (under Bush) has bothered to even try....Clinton allowed Irag to kick out the inspectors and did not do one damn thing to get them back in, not did the UN.
113 posted on 09/12/2002 6:24:54 AM PDT by Moby Grape
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: leprechaun9
When the day comes that his type decides to put some of those Powder Blue Bonnet types in our streets to Enforce UN Resolutions.

Then He'll see brute force.


114 posted on 09/12/2002 6:28:36 AM PDT by Area51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Here's my $0.02. Little Kofi has just painted himself into a corner. When GW says we are going in with or without UN support, Kofi must make sure the UN "authorizes" the action before anything happens in order to fulfill his BS requirement that the UN must sanction any action of this nature. Otherwise he risks making himself and his POS organization irrelevant.

Funny thing is U.S. Congress will do the same thing.

115 posted on 09/12/2002 6:30:39 AM PDT by Boss_Jim_Gettys
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stylin_geek
Tell us how you really feel stylin! ;)
116 posted on 09/12/2002 6:30:44 AM PDT by hunyb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: USA21
Koif is under the misguided impression that the President is actually coming to the UN to listen to them. Much to the contrary, he's on his way there to say, "Let me tell you how it's going to be. Saddle up and ride with us or get out of our way."
117 posted on 09/12/2002 6:36:33 AM PDT by Corin Stormhands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maui_hawaii
Annan will tell U.S. that only U.N. can sanction force....and the U.N sanctions against Iraq worked so well....
118 posted on 09/12/2002 6:50:00 AM PDT by stylin_geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Boss_Jim_Gettys
The ability of the USA to act and succeed diminishes the significance and importance of the UN. When they argue for UN unity, UN elitists are really saying please do not leave us behind. The UN is stuggling to be seen as the leader of the world, the fact that the USA is ACTING like the leader of the world is in no way lost to the UN leadership.

The Kofi Annons and other elitists of the UN see the self defense actions of the USA as a limitation to their ambitions to a world tax system and to previous requests to a standing UN peacekeeping force (army).
119 posted on 09/12/2002 6:50:56 AM PDT by Greeklawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
So, the U.S. provides the bulk of the peace keeping forces internationally, but also has to pay for the privilege of maintaining that force?

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."

120 posted on 09/12/2002 6:56:28 AM PDT by stylin_geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-131 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson