Posted on 04/02/2003 8:51:10 AM PST by NormsRevenge
The Prime Minister's comments over the Iraq war have drawn a sharp rebuke from the United States Embassy, which last night described them as "regrettable".
That is strong criticism in diplomatic language.
The offending statements were Helen Clark's expressed view at the weekend that the war would not have happened had Democrat Al Gore been elected president.
In a subsequent press conference about the comments, she said the war did not appear to be going to plan.
Political opponents have accused her of being anti-American, of further jeopardising a free-trade deal, and of making inappropriate comments about President's Bush's unsuccessful rival.
Neither the Prime Minister nor the embassy would say whether the United States had conveyed disappointment or disapproval to her or the Government over her comments.
Helen Clark's response, through a spokesman, was: "We often receive follow-up inquiries after sensational news reports and we cheerfully respond to them."
But the United States embassy public affairs officer, Bill Millman, said simply: "The Prime Minister's statement was regrettable," a comment which almost certainly would have been approved by senior diplomats.
Asked if "the statement" referred to Mr Gore or to the war not going to plan, he indicated both.
Earlier, under questioning in Parliament, Helen Clark had dismissed the impact of the Gore comments as "neither here nor there".
She continued to find herself on the back foot yesterday over remarks on the Iraq war - which were reported in sections of the Arab press.
Act leader Richard Prebble suggested her comments were more in line with promoting a free-trade agreement with Syria rather than the United States.
Her comments on plans coming unstuck were reported in at least the Arab News, an English-language news service in Saudi Arabia and possibly on Iranian radio. Another comment, that Saddam Hussein might never be caught, was reported in the Khaleej Times, in the United Arab Emirates.
National leader Bill English said the Prime Minister discussed the war, "as if she is some kind of foreign correspondent", in ways that offended New Zealand's friends and allies.
Helen Clark said Australian Prime Minister John Howard was reported as saying that the US hopes for a popular uprising against Saddam were misguided.
"The fact is Mr Howard is in negotiation for a free trade agreement [with the United States]. That does not stop him telling the truth as he sees it about what is happening."
To accusations that she was damaging New Zealand's relationship with the United States, she said she had been stating only "the bleedingly obvious".
But she added that New Zealand valued its relationship with the US.
Earlier she had told reporters: "Let's be clear for the record. Saddam Hussein has an appalling regime. No one is going to be distressed about that going. It has all been about how this issue should have been handled from the outset.
"We hung in there for a diplomatic solution which was possible and, having seen everything that has happened since, I am convinced we hung out for the right objective."
"Inaction?"
Clinton saw more "action" than all of the previous presidents combined. It just wasn't with his wife.
07 April 2003 www.stuff.co.nz
By RUTH BERRY
Prime Minister Helen Clark may have apologised to the Bush administration, but the United States embassy in Wellington is refusing to reciprocate.
Miss Clark has apologised through New Zealand's ambassador in Washington, for any offence caused by her comments about the Bush regime and the war.
But she said the US embassy in Wellington was out of line for issuing a public rebuke without first seeking to clarify them and without advising the Government.
The embassy had said Miss Clark's comments that the war would not have happened had Democrat candidate Al Gore won the last US presidential election were "regrettable".
Her comments that the invasion of Iraq by US and British-led forces did not appear to be going to plan, also sparked concerns.
Senior Foreign Affairs and Trade Ministry and US embassy officials met to discuss and "clarify" the diplomatic row and have agreed on a "communications protocol".
A spokeswoman for the US embassy would not discuss that protocol, but said: "While we have only seen media reports of what the Prime Minister said, we feel the embassy's comment was appropriate and not out of line. We also have no further comment to make on the subject." A spokesman for Miss Clark denied the embassy's statement meant there was a stand-off.
"There's no rift. If stand-off means they are not talking to each other, there is no stand-off. As far as Helen is concerned the matter has been dealt with," the spokesman said.
"The PM says certainly no offence was intended by the comments she made, but . . . it's important now to apologise for what the US took as an offence, and then move the relationship forward from there."
National Party leader Bill English said Miss Clark should now apologise to Australian Prime Minister John Howard.
Miss Clark got a ticking off from The Australian newspaper last week for saying "this Government does not trade the lives of young New Zealanders for a war it does not believe in in order to secure some material advantage".
But Miss Clark's spokesman said Mr English's suggestion was "absolute rubbish". Miss Clark had written to The Australian explaining that the comments were not directed at Australia but at critics who saw her stance on the war as lessening New Zealand's chance of getting a free-trade deal with the US.
Kinda like the dixie chicks huh? ;-)
The war would not have happened had Neville Chamberlain been elected president either.
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.