As ever, with you at the first, with you to the last.
Regards, Ivan
Posted on 03/13/2003 1:19:03 AM PST by MadIvan
TONY Blair made his final gamble on winning United Nations approval for war with Iraq yesterday as he laid out a six-point ultimatum for Saddam Hussein to disarm.
His plan triggered chaotic horsetrading at the UN headquarters in New York, leading a frustrated United States to demand a final decision by tomorrow.
Mr Blair prepared for his move to end in failure yesterday, saying that he is prepared to send British troops to Iraq even without the UN’s authority. A defeated resolution could mean war by Sunday.
Britain yesterday released a "tick list" of tasks for Saddam. They demand that the Iraqi president makes a televised confession about stockpiling banned weapons materials, and that he declares a "strategic decision" to give them up.
This list would run alongside, but not be part of, a second UN resolution - whose fate now lies with five states: Angola, Cameroon, Mexico, Chile and Guinea. Their ambassadors appeared to switch positions back and forth yesterday, leaving it unclear where any stood.
Spain argued that, as France has promised to veto a second resolution no matter what it contains, it is better to tear up the plan rather than hold a vote certain to be defeated.
Ana Palacio, Spain’s foreign minister, said France’s determination to apply its veto "whatever the circumstances" meant the second resolution, co-sponsored by her government, should be torn up.
And, in a sign that the British government increasingly accepts it will not achieve a second resolution, Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, admitted he also had doubts.
He made little effort to hide his contempt for France and its determination to use its veto in the Security Council, saying: "What I guarantee is that we are working as hard as we possibly can to secure a second resolution. We are having to do so in circumstances in which one of the permanent members of the Security Council has said, whatever the circumstances, they will veto a resolution, so that is not easy."
If a vote is to be held, it is likely to be taken tomorrow, at the UN headquarters .
It is understood that if the motion fails to win a majority, the US is ready to start military action within hours.
Mr Blair dealt easily with Conservative taunts in the Commons following an outburst against him by Clare Short, the International Development Secretary.
There was a sign yesterday that Labour MPs, even some doubters, were finally falling in behind their leader as Mr Blair won majority support at the weekly meeting of the party’s politicians held at Westminster.
Mike O’Brien, the Foreign Office minister, declared: "Today was the day that the tide turned."
Jack McConnell, the First Minister, will this morning decide whether he will personally defend Mr Blair in today’s key debate in the Scottish Parliament. Mr McConnell has stayed out of all previous debates on the issue, but is being urged to break his silence by Labour MSPs.
Britain’s six-point ultimatum is being sold to the Security Council as a "peace plan" in an attempt to secure the nine votes needed for a new resolution.
However, the government has all but written off any prospect of French support.
Mr Blair said his six tests are essential to send "the strongest possible signal out to Saddam Hussein that he has now to disarm or face the consequences".
He also told the Commons that UK troops would take part in any United States-led military action against Iraq.
His comments were designed to heal the rift over a threat by Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, that America would "go it alone" if the government failed to get parliamentary approval for war.
Mr Blair told MPs: "The reason why it is important that we hold firm to the course we have set is because what is at stake is not whether the US goes alone or not, it is whether the international community is prepared to back up the clear instruction it gave Saddam Hussein with the necessary action.
"That is why I am determined to hold to the course we have set out."
Mr Blair was disrupted on his way to meet the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, in London last night to try to seek consensus on war.
Police said the Prime Minister’s car was forced to stop and a number plate was partly pulled from the front of the vehicle.
Peter Tatchell, the human rights campaigner, was arrested afterwards over an alleged breach of the peace.
As ever, with you at the first, with you to the last.
Regards, Ivan
One cannot help but to conclude that the purpose of the UN is to force America to kneel before nations like these.
In this instance, Iraq represents absolutism, as does Iran and North Korea, and these are defended by France. And the forces of liberty, old and new are riding into battle against them.
Regards, Ivan
What is going on in the British government....it's like they are of two minds.
Regards, Ivan
BTW don't you ever sleep??
Regards, Ivan
The purpose of the UN is to check American power, period.
America is the only country that does not need an alliance since we can beat any combination of them.
BUMP
A vote of no confidence will not happen; that would cause the entire government to fall and fresh elections to occur, neither of which is on the cards. What even the most extreme Labour Party leftist wants is Blair to be replaced as leader of the Labour Party; this is extremely difficult as the Labour Party membership as a whole, not just the MPs, have to decide on this, and requires a special conference and vote. It would be extraordinarily hard to do all this.
The Tories will vote, with only 3 or 4 exceptions, for the war, as will the Ulster Unionist parties.
Regards, Ivan
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.