'Moment of Truth' in the Azores

BBC ^ | March 15, 2003 | Paul Reynolds

[Dog Gone]

The carefully choreographed meeting in the Azores between George Bush, Tony Blair and Jose Maria Aznar is in effect a council of war.

After deadlock, the "moment of truth"

Officially, the line is that it will examine the possibility of taking diplomacy forward, and it could be that the Security Council will be offered one last and brief chance to reach agreement.

But the reality is that the Council negotiations are getting nowhere, the United States is running out of patience, and "the moment of truth", as Mr Bush's National Security adviser Condoleezza Rice put it, is at hand.

What "the moment of truth" means is the abandoning of the attempts to get the elusive second resolution and taking a decision to go to war.

Such an announcement would need extremely delicate handling, especially by Mr Blair, who would have to explain why, despite his confident predictions, there was to be no new resolution and why war would be legal.

Which is why this summit has been so carefully arranged.

It did not actually have to be held at all - the telephone would have done just as well for decision-making.

But consider the presentational advantages of the format for all concerned, particularly the British prime minister.

By choosing the mid-Atlantic setting of the Azores, Tony Blair does not have to be seen running to the White House; Mr Bush tries to show that he is not directing it all from Washington; Mr Aznar gets his reward for co-sponsoring the resolution and provides another European figure to demonstrate that Britain is not alone on its side of the ocean.

War 'not far off'

And to further point up the co-ordinated nature of these events, there was the sudden announcement by Mr Bush on Friday that he was going to release the long delayed "road map" for negotiations leading to a Palestinian state.

White House officials were even saying that the soon to be appointed Palestinian Prime Minister Abu Mazen, would be received by the President in due course.

Thus the exposed flank of the American-British position was covered.

Mr Bush's weekly radio address on Saturday added another indication that war is not far off.

It was not the language of diplomacy... it was preparing people for war

It was not the language of diplomacy - it was the language of preparing people for war.

"We must recognise that some threats are so grave that they must be removed, even if it requires military force," he said.

"Governments are now showing whether their stated commitment to liberty and security are words alone - or convictions they are prepared to act upon."

Mr Aznar, whose right-wing views have made him a willing ally in this crisis, added his own comment:

'Not morally acceptable'

"Not acting to rid the world of weapons of mass destruction is neither politically nor morally acceptable," he said.

Spain, though, has sent no troops to help enforce this principle.

The UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who will be reluctant to admit that there will be a war until five minutes before it happens, has said that it is now "more probable".

American troops are ready to go

With such words being uttered in advance, there appears to be little doubt about the outcome.

Indeed, we learn that the White House speechwriters have already started work on Mr Bush's address in which he will tell the American people that they are going to war.

Even the Azores have a symbolic significance - they are owned by Portugal, Britain's oldest ally.

The historically and literary minded will recall another event there involving the British and the Spanish, immortalised in Tennyson's poem, The Revenge.

The first line was familiar to generations of British schoolchildren:

"At Flores in the Azores, Sir Richard Grenville lay"

Inspiring story

Grenville was one of the mariners (pirates in the Spanish view) so loved by Queen Elizabeth I.

But he got caught by the Spanish fleet in the Azores and his little ship Revenge fought alone and to the death - a typically inspiring story of heroic British failure.

The poem is full of anti-Spanish sentiment ("Let us bang these dogs of Seville, the children of the devil").

One wonders if Mr Blair will recite it to Jose Maria Aznar as they look out across the waters and consider how alliances change.

[wadecollins]

Britain will pull out without a second resolution.

[MEG33]

Not likely.

[xJones]

Boy, is Chiraq going to be pissed now. He demanded that an idiot like Mugabe be allowed to come to Paris, and Chiraq didn't even get an invite for this conference. The serious players are taking over.

[jwalsh07]

Britain will pull out without a second resolution.

Nope.

[Dog Gone]

The British won't pull out.

Blair can't pull out without losing Tory support, and his enemies in Labour wouldn't likely forgive him.

It's far better to go ahead, and reap the benefits of victory over Saddam.

[xm177e2]

That's crazy--that would hurt Blair more than seeing this through.

[WOSG]

no, Blair and Straw were clear this week that they have the authority without the UN. They didnt want to go this way, and it is why we have waited an extra week to try the diplomacy.

Really, the question now is:

A) Ask for a resolution on Monday, watch it get vetoed, and then go ahead anyway with war. OR

B) Just go ahead without a second resolution, using 1441 as the 'cover', and with an independent declaration and ultimatum to Iraq - disarm or die. OR

C) Waffle, wimp out, let Blix call the shots, and go home.

Let's take the bets ... I am betting on "B". The *reason* for an Azores meeting is for them to have some public delcaration coming out that lays out the ultimatum under our terms. They wouldnt need this meeting at all if the security council outcome were to be positive ... this is clearly a "plan B". In other words, it is an indication that UN Security Council can no longer be the avenue for diplomacy and challenge to Iraq.

So I am *hopeful* about this visit, as it signals a move *boeyond* the UN security council. It is a convocation of the 'coalition of the willing' about what to do.


I think they will offer Saddam 3-5 days to do what the UK
was proposing, or we will attack. If nothing happens, we go forward, by the end of this week.

Blair has his right flank covered with Ian Smith and Conservatives supporting Blair for now. He wont pull out now.

20% chance of A, 80% chance of B, 0% chance of C.

[Guyin4Os]

You are right. Use #1441 as the mandate to disarm Saddam. Form an International body for the new Millennium, the charter members of which are the US, the UK and Spain. Defeat Saddam, install democracy. Then invite other nations to join this NEW International body as an alternative to the now-irrelevant UN.

[Salman]

The moment of truth...

... is the mooment before the matador kills the bull

You do not want this woman angry at you.

[Bosco]

This meeting is very significant aside from the obvious issue with Iraq. It's significant because of the presence of Spain and Britain and the absence of France and Germany. I see it as a shift in American attention towards Spain and a new relationship between the two countries and away from France and Germany. In the past Spain was in the car but in the back seat - now they are in the front seat and France and Germany are thumbing a ride to wherever they are going.

[Dog Gone]

Spain has clearly vaulted onto the world stage.

[CareyRuger]

Are we all Absolutely Positive that US, GB and Spain are the ONLY SC members coming to this meeting??

[Dog Gone]

I think so. The Bulgarian PM flatly denied today that he would attend, and he'd be my first guess.

[swheats]

[UnBlinkingEye]

You do not want this woman angry at you.

I don't want this woman involved in national policy decisions. She is a misguided globalist, no friend of the Constitution or national sovereignity. I am not a supporter of the UN nor am I in favor of American empire.

[CommandoFrank]

I vote for 'B'.

[Dog Gone]

You are so wrong. But you're used to that by now.

[wadecollins]

No. What I mean is he will face a "vote of no confidence" and we will see an election knock him out. We need more evidence.