IRAQ-UN: Iraqi Climbdown Poses Questions for U.S.

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 20 1997 (IPS) - Iraq’s agreement Thursday to allow the return of U.N. weapons monitors – including U.S. nationals – offerered a way out of the tense military standoff with the United States but could push Washington into a compromise on sanctions, U.N. observers said.

U.S. diplomats were quick to stress they have not offered Baghdad anything in return for what Iraqi and Russian officials agreed would be the “unconditional return of the U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM).”

“There have been no deals, no carrots, no winks,” said Bill Richardson, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. “Maybe Iraq has blinked and come to its senses.”

Iraqi Ambassador Nizar Hamdoon Thursday delivcered to the Security Council Baghdad’s official declaration that UNSCOM, including its U.S. members, could resume its work.

“The crisis is over,” Hamdoon said.

Some elements of the deal worked out by Russian Foreign Minister Yevgeny Primakov, however, have become evident. On Friday, the U.N. Security Council and UNSCOM will meet in New York to discuss “ways to make UNSCOM’s work more effective,” according to a joint statement agreed to in Geneva by the foreign ministers of Britain, France, Russia and the United States, as well as a junior Chinese official.

Although the joint statement stressed “the unconditional and complete fulfillment by Iraq of all the relevant resolutions of the Security Council,” it also endorsed Primakov’s diplomatic initiative.

That in itself could be viewed as a retreat by the United States, which strongly urged that there be no negotiations with Baghdad after its Oct. 29 decision to bar U.S. nationals from UNSCOM work in Iraq, observers said.

In his first comment on developments, President Bill Clinton said Thursday that the United States would stay on guard in the coming days while “we wait and see whether (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein does in fact comply with the will of the international community.”

Clinton said in Washington that the United States would “remain resolute in our determination to prevent him from threatening his neighbours , or the world, with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.”

U.N. observers believed there may also be other terms to Primakov’s initiative. The Russian foreign minister has indicated that the Security Council should show it will make good on its promise to lift the seven-year U.N. embargo against Baghdad once UNSCOM has verified that Iraq’s biological, chemical, nuclear and long-range missile capabilities are scrapped.

Iraq also wants a gradual phasing out of sanctions, and a shift in UNSCOM’s composition that would reduce the proportion of U.S. nationals. The discussions to improve UNSCOM could achieve the latter aim, by adding more inspectors from France, Russia and other nations with which the Baghdad government has better relations.

The United States, however, argues that no such deals will be struck. “The Russia-Iraq initiative is not binding on the United States or the Security Council,” Richardson said. “Why should Iraq be rewarded for reversing themselves after having committed an illegal act? Compliance should not be rewarded with carrots.”

Still, observers believed the the standoff over Iraq embarrassed Washington, which failed to win support – even from such Arab allies as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia – for military action against Baghdad. The long embargo and the collapse of the Israeli- Palestinian peace process also have isolated the United States in the region, as U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright learned during a visit there last week to bolster unity against Baghdad.

In the United Nations, as well, diplomats have been eager to accept a peaceful resolution to the nearly month-old crisis. “I think it is encouraging, but we will have to wait to get the inspectors in to see what happens,” said U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday.

However, if Iraq allows UNSCOM to resume its monitoring, Annan has already suggested that the government is entitled to a “fair hearing” of its grievances about sanctions in the Security Council.

“I think the food-for-oil (agreement) can be strengthened and can work better,” Annan said of the Security Council deal which allows Iraq to sell one billion dollars of oil every 90 days to pay for humanitarian goods. Iraq has complained that humanitarian supplies arrive too slowly, and Albright conceded the system, which is tightly monitored by the Security Council, could be improved.

Annan added that “it is inevitable that, sooner or later, we will need to look at what is happening in Iraq.”

Nevertheless, Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov insisted that, although “there can be nothing wrong about (pursuing) economic interests,” the crucial emphasis should be on ensuring that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are disarmed before any sanctions end. “We have to resume the monitoring as soon as possible,” he said.

For his part, Richardson stressed that Washington is “not ready to lift sanctions,” and is still prepared to veto any such lifting in the Security Council if it believes Iraq is not in compliance. Iraqi officials contend that the U.S. government is determined to maintain sanctions, regardless of weapons compliance, until President Saddam Hussein is ousted or dead.

Questions also remain about how much the Council can bend on UNSCOM. About 14 percent of the more than 100 UNSCOM inspectors and supporting staff are U.S. nationals, and although their proportional weight could be diluted if the monitoring force is expanded overall – as Iraq wants – UNSCOM Chair Richard Butler has resisted making any changes to his team on the basis of nationality.

“There’s no way that the arbitrary exclusion of any nationality… wouldn’t affect UNSCOM at some point,” Butler, an Australian national, argued. Nor does he feel that the end of the monitors’ weapons inspections is near.

Although Iraq has accounted for the destruction of nearly all of its Scud missiles and much of its chemical weapons stocks, UNSCOM remains concerned about Iraq’s potential for biological weapons and insists on long-term monitoring to prevent the rebuilding of its arsenal.