Posted on 03/11/2003 2:36:55 PM PST by knighthawk
No further hand-wringing debate is necessary
When chief weapons inspector Hans Blix reported last Friday to the United Nations Security Council, there was something truly bizarre about the moment. Those opposed to military action seized on increased Iraqi co-operation, but a careful reading properly leads to the necessity for swift action.
"One can hardly avoid the impression that after a period of somewhat reluctant co-operation, there's been an acceleration of initiative from the Iraqi side since the end of January," Blix said. "This is welcome. But the value of these measures must be soberly judged by how many question marks they actually succeed in straightening out. This is not yet clear.
"Against this background, the question is now asked whether Iraq has co-operated, 'immediately, unconditionally and actively,' with [inspectors], as is required under Paragraph 9 of Resolution 1441 ...
"It is obvious that while the numerous initiatives which are now taken by the Iraqi side with a view to resolving some longstanding, open disarmament issues can be seen as active or proactive, these initiatives three to four months into the new resolution cannot be said to constitute immediate cooperation. Nor do they necessarily cover all areas of relevance." (Quotes from Blix, emphasis added.)
It is now reported that Blix had much more to say in a privately distributed 173-page document. Apparently, inspectors have uncovered an illicit unmanned aircraft program capable of delivering chemical and biological weapons at a range of 500 kilometres. Other sources are citing discovery of bombs designed to widely disperse such weapons.
Let's just get this straight. Twelve years after suing for peace on the basis that he would immediately disarm, and four months after unanimous passage of Resolution 1441, Saddam Hussein is still not complying. He might be doing a little bit here and there, but once again he has been judged guilty of non-compliance.
This has been going on since 1991. Faced then with total defeat and the fall of Baghdad at the hands of a global military coalition in response to his 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Saddam agreed to terms that he obviously never intended to fulfill. He has obstructed and breached his obligations every step of the way. In the ensuing years, while repeated UN resolutions demanded compliance, Saddam advanced on Kuwait again, attacked Kurds in the northern "safe haven" and threw weapons inspectors out of his country entirely. Now, surrounded by several hundred thousands of the world's best trained and equipped military forces, whose leaders have made it clear they will deliver another crushing blow, Saddam gives a little bit here and there, but still cannot bring himself to comply.
For this, Saddam is receiving support from once reputable members of the international community such as France and Germany. They have played directly into Saddam's hands, mesmerized by appeasement. Their game is insidious, and it is clear that money rather than doing what is right defines their foreign policy. It is France that is truly motivated by oil politics, and Germany that is motivated by economics, not the U.S.
All this simplifies what Canada must do now. Neither international law nor sanctions nor diplomacy nor the threat of imminent military conflict has moved Saddam Hussein to full compliance. Nothing short of war is working. If you were Saddam, and sincerely intended to disarm, wouldn't you have done it by now, and more urgently while staring down the gun barrels now pointed your way?
It is time for Canada to fully support our British and American allies. Our government's efforts to strike a compromise resolution may have been effective in creating Saddam's last clear chance, and there is credit due in that regard. But Saddam is not responding. We need to stand with our friends in what comes next.
Robert Fulford had it right in his column, drawing recently from Jonathan Swift's 18th century adage that "you cannot reason someone out of a belief if they were never reasoned into it." Saddam never really accepted the UN's terms of peace, he has ignored its exhortations to comply, and he should no longer have the benefit of its protection. No further resolutions or hand-wringing debate is necessary.
War is never desirable, but sometimes necessary. It is necessary now. The indictment against the Iraqi regime has been proven over and over. When war comes, and ends, it is essential that Canada will have stood unequivocally with the coalition of the willing, and been counted as a reliable friend to Britain and the United States.
The world faces a competition between the self-interests of Saddam and his French and German friends, and British and American-led interests seeking to enforce international law; eradicate state-sponsored terrorism and weapons proliferation; rescue the Iraqi people from a brutal dictator and vest them with freedom; and create a legitimate Iraqi partner in the quest for peace in the Middle East.
The choice for Canada is clear.
BTTT!
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.