Quit Baghdad or war this week, Bush tells Saddam

The Sunday Times ^ | March 16, 2003 | Tony Allen-Mills and Jonathan Carr-Brown

[MadIvan]

BRITAIN and America are to issue a stark ultimatum to Saddam Hussein — get out of Iraq or face war later this week.

Saddam will be given "days" to flee into exile before a US-led military invasion begins, according to senior officials in Washington and London.

The details of the final warning will be discussed by George W Bush and Tony Blair at a summit with Jose Maria Aznar, the Spanish prime minister, in the Azores today.

While telephone diplomacy will continue in a last effort to get the support of a majority of the United Nations Security Council, the two leaders have agreed there is virtually no chance of winning a vote on a resolution to authorise the use of force. They have therefore determined to enforce "regime change" in Baghdad without a second resolution.

"Saddam will be given a short period of time to get out of Baghdad. If he fails to do that, military action will follow," one official said.

Blair met ministers at No 10 yesterday and an emergency cabinet meeting will be held tomorrow. The government will announce that Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, has advised that war without a second UN resolution would be legal. Labour whips expect a Commons debate on Iraq and vote on Tuesday.

The prospect of war without UN backing is expected to lead to the resignation of Robin Cook, the leader of the Commons, from the cabinet. Sources close to Cook said he would go if there was no second resolution. "He doesn't feel he can support military action without the clear, unambiguous support of the UN," said one.

Blair is now considering offering him a job as a European commissioner to replace Neil Kinnock or Chris Patten, who are due to leave Brussels next year.

Clare Short, the international development secretary, was still considering whether to resign after Blair urged her to remain in her post and support the rebuilding of Iraq. An aide said she had been encouraged by America's new Middle East peace plan, which the prime minister helped to initiate. Her "bottom line", however, remained a second resolution.

Blair's personal efforts last week appear to have eased some of the tensions in his party. There was speculation that Michael Meacher, the environment minister, might resign, but several ministerial aides who had warned they would go indicated yesterday they were reconsidering.

A cabinet source said that while "deep divisions" remained, the past week had seen a "mood swing". Rebel leaders predict they will attract 40 to 60 votes in the Commons in addition to the 122 who previously opposed the government. The number is smaller than was forecast a week ago.

Fewer than five parliamentary private secretaries are now expected to rebel. One aide who was considering resigning a week ago, Peter Bradley, said: "I think the landscape has changed . . . I and others have realised that the French posturing for peace has made diplomacy impossible and war almost inevitable."

Planners will give weapons inspectors and other "vulnerable" foreigners time to leave Iraq. "We are not going to start bombing out of the blue," an official said. Other officials indicated that Washington has decided not to accept any further token gestures by Baghdad to comply with weapons inspectors.

On Friday, Iraq handed the UN a 20-page document supposedly detailing its destruction of 3.9 tons of VX nerve agent.

"It is time to come to a conclusion," warned Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser. "The moment of truth is coming here." Bush's approval for war follows the near collapse of a British-led compromise effort to obtain the nine security council votes necessary to pass a second resolution.

Bush and Blair will decide today whether to force the issue to a vote despite the apparent certainty of failure, or to withdraw it and claim that legal authority for an attack is provided by earlier resolutions. The Americans believe that only Saddam's removal from power will guarantee full Iraqi disarmament.

Bush warned in a radio address yesterday that he saw little hope of disarmament without force. "Crucial days lie ahead," he said. "Governments are now showing whether their stated commitments to liberty and security are words alone — or convictions they're prepared to act on."

While Saddam has always derided attempts to persuade him to step down voluntarily, American and British officials believe he might have second thoughts once it is clear that war is imminent.

"What would you do?" one official asked. "There are 250,000 troops and God knows how many precision missiles floating around the Gulf with lots of US colonels aching to use them. Exile must be an option."

Several states are believed to have offered Saddam possible refuge, including Belarus, Libya and Syria. Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, has indicated that Washington would be ready to allow Saddam to leave if it meant a genuine change of regime. However, a plan for a last-minute appeal by Arab leaders to Saddam to go into exile and avert a war has been shelved because he has given no indication he would agree.

American officials suggested last week that revolt was growing in Iraqi military ranks. Bush has been advised by the CIA that the likelihood of a military coup against Saddam has increased.

"Our intelligence contains lots of information about disaffection and preparations to surrender or flee, which is all encouraging," one official said. Both the CIA and the Defence Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's intelligence arm, have concluded that the Iraqi leadership is "brittle".

In an effort to curb international suspicion that the war is aimed at securing oil riches, Bush and Blair are expected to agree that the Iraqi oil industry's profits should go into a fund for the country's people.

The imminence of military action has been emphasised by the rare use of heavy B1 bombers in a mission over the Iraqi no-fly zone. The bombers hit two radar sites in western Iraq.

As war preparations gathered pace, Iraq sought fresh disarmament talks, inviting the top UN weapons inspectors to Baghdad as soon as possible. Hans Blix said he would discuss the invitiation with his colleague Mohammed El Baradei. The two were expected to consult the security council tomorrow when Blix is due to deliver his latest progress report.

Meanwhile, France called for a foreign ministers' meeting of the security council on Tuesday to discuss a "realistic timetable" for Saddam to disarm. In a statement issued jointly with Russia and Germany, France declared that there was no justification for a war. "We reaffirm that nothing justifies in the present circumstances putting a stop to the inspection process and resorting to the use of force," said the declaration.

Mahmoud Abbas, expected to be confirmed as Palestinian prime minister, could be invited to Washington as part of Bush's attempts to convince the doubting Arab world that he is serious about relaunching the Middle East peace process. The proposal came after the president promised to publish a "road map" that would culminate in a Palestinian state in 2005.

[SierraWasp]

Hey Ivan! When do we start the wake for Saddumb?

[winner3000]

Other losers: the small countries that were promised stuff for their votes. Since apparently enough of them decided to screw us, none of them will collect. Don't pass Go, don't collect $. No soup for you!

[Jim Noble]

>>"He doesn't feel he can support military action without the clear, unambiguous support of the UN," said one. <<

I didn't know there was anyone this stupid.

[knak]

My money is that the 3-days notice to aid workers, human shields, and inspectors might be a part of tomorrow's remarks.

I'm with you on that one. I don't think we even want the UN to meet at all on this anymore.

[Robert_Paulson2]

We may be experiencing a bio attack as we speak, of an undefined, incurable pneumoniac plague... the positioning of key control and command of the three nations in charge, makes perfect sense to me.

[JoeSchem]

If Saddam indeed has weapons of mass destruction and ties to al-Qaeda, the aftermath of this all-too-brief war is going to look very, very bad for the Democrats, the French, and the UN.

[smith288]

The government will announce that Lord Goldsmith, the attorney-general, has advised that war without a second UN resolution would be legal.

So, like, do we get 17 or 18 resolutions and 12 yrs before we take our own regime out???

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

"Things are afoot. Us folks in the international side are seeing things develop before they hit the domestic papers."

I believe you.

[Victoria Delsoul]

While telephone diplomacy will continue in a last effort to get the support of a majority of the United Nations Security Council, the two leaders have agreed there is virtually no chance of winning a vote on a resolution to authorise the use of force. They have therefore determined to enforce "regime change" in Baghdad without a second resolution.

That's right. One resolution is good enough! I definitely admire GW for his determination to do the right thing.

[WaterDragon]

Thanks for the ping, M&M. I don't want Saddam to go into exile. He needs killing, to rid the earth of his evil completely.

[vannrox]

.


This is the plan as I see it...
Bush has the following plan: He intends to Kill Saddam using a very sly technique. So outrageous and simple that we have never fought a war in this way ever before.

His plan is to kill Saddam by either Heart attack or old age. What I mean is that he is going to kill him by "old age", because Saddma is just waiting and waiting for the US to get it's act going.How many months has it been since we announced that Iraq had better meet it's UN sansions? 14 months? Yessur. Either Saddam will die of stomach ulcers and migranes because of the endless wavering and diddling that the US is doing with the UN, or...

Bush is going to keep the plans going back and forth in committee until Saddam dies of old age...maybe 90 years old. So in 2035, the USA can declare a victory over the entire Iraq mess.

There is also the chance that he intends to drive him crazy. All the endless speculation of war vrs. no-war is going to make Americans crazy! Can you imagine what it would do to Saddam?


.

[McGavin999]

I don't really care what Mexico or Cameroon thinks. Their cards aren't important anywhere outside of the Security Council.

The Limp Six already laid their cards on the table when they couldn't make up their minds. That told us all we needed to know about them.

[Dog Gone]

But who cared anyway? Third world nations shouldn't have to make first world decisions. Their domestic problems are far more than they can handle.

[MeekOneGOP]

Amen !

[MeekOneGOP]

You bet. Yep. He's Bad bad bad !!! . . .

CRUSH Saddam !!

[MeekOneGOP]

I think we all know that there is NO WAY the Megalomaniac Saddam will accept any type of agreement to walk away. Bush, Blair, Anzar all know that . . .

[rundy]

France: You lose.
Germany: You lose.
Russia: You lose.

You are all losers. NO French oil companies in liberated Iraq. NO Russian oil companies in liberated Iraq. NO repayment of Saddam's debt to Russian.

Vlad Putin isn't that smart after all. He has chosen the losing side. Loser.

I really supsect that when our forces actually go in and clean up IRAQ they will find all sorts of evidence that these three (axis of weasels, France, Germany, and Russia) have been providing Iraq materials for weapons and other things restricted or forbidden by UN Resoultions. They want to be sure no one finds the evidence.

Sorry weasels, you are about to be exposed!

[Balata]

I think there's an outside chance Saddam will end up in Iran. He has a lot of money to bargin with and Iran may now have nuclear capabilities. If he goes anywhere else we'll get him, but Iran perhaps a different story. There were also recent reports Saddam was putting a large chunk of his money into diamonds, a more universal currency.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the heads ups!

[WOSG]

Meeting makes a lot of sense, think about Yalta, Teheran, in the WWII. It's a way to clarify what we need to do now that UN diplomacy has failed, it a way to clarify what the 'coalition of the willing' wants, and make the war goals clear and unified.

I am very encouraged by the noises from UK that MadIvan is posting. In particular the 'war by wednesday'. it tells me that the 'coalition of the willing'has made the STRATEGIC DECISION TO DISARM IRAQ BY FORCE.