Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unite This!
The Weekly Standard ^ | 03/07/03 | David Brooks

Posted on 03/06/2003 9:14:43 PM PST by Pokey78

George W. Bush tells the United Nations that he's going with or without them--but he wants to see their cards anyway.

THE MOST SIGNIFICANT THING President Bush said during his press conference--just about the only significant thing he said--is that regardless of the whip count, he will put a second resolution up for a vote in the U.N. Security Council.

This is remarkably bold. The normal thing to do, especially if three of the major powers are threatening vetoes, is to withdraw the resolution, and thereby try to diffuse the showdown. But Bush has chosen the path of maximum confrontation. So imagine this scenario: The United States puts forward its resolution. It gets vetoed, or even voted down by a majority of the members. And then, on the heels of U.N. rejection, the United States still launches an attack against Iraq. This would give the expression "in your face" new dimensions of meaning.

Maybe Bush thinks that by essentially threatening the diplomatic equivalent of the doomsday scenario, he can induce Russia, China, and France to abstain, rather than veto the resolution. But it is an incredible gamble. It certainly does nothing to help Tony Blair, who has been trying to somehow finesse things at the United Nations.

If the resolution fails and the United States acts successfully, then the consequences will be amazing. The U.N. process will have been fully discredited. I happen to believe the East River will run gold with champagne before another U.S. president, of either party, takes another problem of this sort to the United Nations anyway. The process there is simply too treacherous and too dishonest for any president to trust. But this would really ruin the organization.

If on the other hand the United States acts over a negative U.N. vote and the action is not successful, then some of the American public, and much of the American elite, would lose confidence in non-U.N. actions of all sorts. The multilateralists would gloat and Kofi Annan and his successors would suddenly emerge as powerful global figures.

I hope the administration has thought all this through. I do suspect that the decision to pursue this confrontational course emerges from Bush's own nature. He is a man of his word. He expects others to be that way too. It is indisputably true that Saddam has not disarmed. If people are going to vote against a resolution saying Saddam has not disarmed then they are liars. Bush wants them to do it in public, where history can easily judge them. Needless to say, neither the French nor the Russians nor the Chinese believe that honesty has anything to do with diplomacy. They see the process through an entirely different lens.

The rest of the press conference was a bore. The reporters tended to ask the same questions over and over again. Bush was repetitive and often long-winded. He broke no news in his opening statement, and spoke remarkably little about the recent captures in Pakistan.

Still, we are on course for war, a week from Monday if you want my guess. Bush set the bar for Hans Blix incredibly high.

After that, to switch metaphors, he is forcing everyone to show their cards. The 12-year diplomatic game is coming to a close.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 03/06/2003 9:14:43 PM PST by Pokey78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
This is funny, because I just read another thread which says that Bush and Blair are planning to bolt the UN if they don't get an approval on the resolution.

And ... by bolting I mean, Bush is planning to pull membership in the UN (suspended), and possibly permanent!!

Maybe this whole UN thing was part of the plan to dump this joke of an organization.
2 posted on 03/06/2003 9:34:50 PM PST by CyberAnt ( -> -> -> Oswego!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
"maybe this was part of the plan..."

From your mouth to God's ears!

The UN is pure filth. We need to wash our hands of it and Nato. We need no one's permission to safeguard our present and future populace, nor our allies and innocents abroad.
3 posted on 03/06/2003 9:50:55 PM PST by MeekMom (( Please visit http://CNLGLFG.com) (HUGE Ann-Fan!!!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"If on the other hand the United States acts over a negative U.N. vote and the action is not successful..."

What is this person smoking?
4 posted on 03/06/2003 9:54:29 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian (Okie by proxy, raised by Yankees, temporarily Californian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeekMom
Ya beat me to it.
5 posted on 03/06/2003 9:55:27 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian (Okie by proxy, raised by Yankees, temporarily Californian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Blue Collar Christian
What happens if a ton of VX gas is released and drifts through Baghdad and 200,000 people die?

No matter what we do after that, one can hardly call it a "success". I pray it goes well. I think we have to do it. The outcome is far from certain though.
6 posted on 03/06/2003 11:15:06 PM PST by DB (©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DB
Wouldnt be our fault because WE dont use chemical weapons.

Besides, saddam doesnt have any chem weapons, he said so himself. /sarcasm
7 posted on 03/06/2003 11:17:58 PM PST by Sabretooth (Cant wait for MPPA to pass in MN.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DB
If VX gas is released and people die, it will not be the US realeasing that gas. If Saddam blows all his oil wells, it will not be the US that causes it.

This behavior is somewhat anticipated by the US, and that much more reason for the urgency of this "disarmament" in what ever form it ends up taking. The longer ridding the world of this regime is put off, the worse the consequences.

There will always be consequences.

The success of the US forces and their allies is certain, the consequences are not.

Let us pray.
8 posted on 03/07/2003 9:50:18 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian (Okie by proxy, raised by Yankees, temporarily Californian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson