FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD
Posted on 01/12/2003 11:34:13 PM PST by Brian Allen
Tony Blair will today try to calm Labour Party anxiety over war in Iraq by insisting that Britain will not rush into an American-led conflict without seeking renewed United Nations backing.
His message is designed to reassure party members, and an increasingly sceptical public, who do not believe the necessary proof has been found to justify risking British lives in a new Gulf war.
Mr Blair came under more pressure yesterday to reassure the party and the public when Clare Short, the International Development Secretary, said it was Britain's "duty" to act as a restraining influence on Washington.
Insisting that she was merely stating Government policy, Miss Short said: "Britain is absolutely clear and the Prime Minister is absolutely clear that we stick with the UN process we have got and we are not deviating from it."
Until now the Prime Minister has kept open the option of acting with the US, if the UN cannot agree a specific resolution on war.
But, with his backbenchers increasingly restive and the public unconvinced, Downing Street realises a change of emphasis is needed.
At a televised press conference today Mr Blair is expected to stress that UN weapons inspectors must be given more time and that, if possible, a second UN resolution should be passed to authorise war.
"Our strategy is clear; that process must be allowed to take place fully," said a Downing Street spokesman.
The shift came as a survey for The Sunday Telegraph found that 69 per cent of local Labour Party chairmen expected members to leave the party if Britain went to war, with five per cent saying they would resign themselves.
Mr Blair will face questions on Iraq from his MPs at a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party on Wednesday.
At the weekend, Clive Soley, a former chairman of the PLP, said Mr Blair risked a repeat of the 1956 Suez campaign, when Sir Anthony Eden lost the premiership after taking Britain into war without public support.
In a further move to assuage backbenchers Mr Blair indicated that when he visits Washington this month he is prepared to try to persuade President George W Bush that UN inspectors must be given more time.
Ministers are confident that if that wish is granted evidence against Saddam Hussein will be found, or he will try to obstruct the inspectors.
That would put him in clear breach of the existing UN resolution and allow the Security Council to pass a second resolution authorising military action.
Yesterday the US stepped up its preparations for war, ordering another 27,000 troops to the Gulf. This took the number mobilised since Friday to 62,000.
John Reid, the Labour Party chairman, said a way had to be found between the two "extremes" of rushing into war and refusing to accept that military action might be necessary.
Downing Street was unable to confirm reports that Dr Hans Blix, head of the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq, will meet Mr Blair in Downing Street next Friday.
British diplomats say that the inspectors must be allowed to continue their work well beyond Jan 27, when Mr Blix is due to make his first full report to the UN Security Council.
Last night Mark Gwozdecky, spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency, said inspectors would need a year to carry out "credible" investigations in full.
He said giving them the necessary time was a more effective method than war of ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction.
"It is a very large country," he said. "There is a lot of ground to cover and a lot of facilities to inspect and you don't do that simply by visiting them once.
"We believe, given the fairly good access we have been getting, the longer we are there, the more we can have a real role to play in detecting anything illegal that might be going on and deterring Iraq from possibly reconstituting any of their capabilities."
But, this time, who will notice that they did not come?
Not US!
But I knew you’d be upto your old tricks again, you know VERY WELL that the Brits are on their way, and have been flying, sailing and standing side by side with the US since the end of the 1st Gulf War. Count yourself lucky that the decision to send people to war and possible death is not yours, it maybe harder than you think. And, for all the promises of other nations, who else has dispatched ANY forces in support of the US?
Where are your much vaunted Kiwi’s Brian? I'll tell you. At home, where they plan to stay for the duration, sipping latte’s and eating white bait fritters. Even if they had the political will to join the fray they have no way of getting to Iraq, C130’s keep breaking down and their one troop carrying ship (HMNZS Charles Upham) has been sold to transport oranges around the Spanish coast. In my very humble opinion, it isn’t the way to honour your most decorated soldier.
If it’s irrelevance you want Brian look no further than the land of your birth, Kiwi’s could export the stuff.
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.