IRAQ-UN: Security Council to Move on Travel Ban

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 11 1997 (IPS) - The U.N. Security Council, reacting to Iraq’s prolonged standoff with U.N. weapons inspectors, is ready to approve a ban on travel by Iraqi officials deemed to have thwarted monitoring efforts.

The 15-nation Security Council will vote on a resolution Wednesday to impose such a travel ban, with both Iraq’s detractors – led by the United States and Britain – and defenders, who include France and Russia, ready to back the penalties.

The ban is likely to be seen as mild, however, after a two-week standoff in which Baghdad threatened to expel all U.S. members of the U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) monitoring team in Iraq. Still, U.S. diplomats have lauded it as an example of U.N. unity against Iraqi non-compliance.

“The coalition has reunited itself because of Iraqi behaviour,” U.S. Ambassador Bill Richardson said. He argued that the Council is now committed to “a strong resolution with teeth in it” that will “send an unmistakalbe message to the government of Iraq.”

Yet there are as many signs of division as of unity in the Council and among U.N. member states on the latest dispute over Iraq. Russia and France are willing to accept the travel ban – on which both nations abstained from voting three weeks ago, prior to the current crisis – but neither country is willing to take any measures that could provoke a military escalation.

French Ambassador Alain Dejammet distanced his government from commitment to any specific penalty, arguing only that Paris wants “the unanimity of the 15 members of the Security Council.”

He added that France also wants the Council to review the current sanctions process against Iraq, which has been under a U.N. embargo for seven years – perhaps even to give Baghdad an indication of some timetable by which the measures may be lifted. “We believe that it is useful to have a view of the prospects,” Dejammet said of the future of sanctions.

In the past, Russia and France – both of which are eager to resume commerce in oil and other fields with Iraq – have been in the lead in pushing for a timetable, to provide a carrot along with the stick of further penalties advocated by the United States and Britain. But Baghdad’s threat to expel the U.S. nationals – six of whom remain in Iraq – and its recent exchange of military rhetoric with Washington, have dimmed prospects for such a timetable, diplomats here say.

“I have not been given any concrete promise that there will be a change” in sanctions policy, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz said Tuesday. Aziz was given a message by the Council Tuesday asking Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to rescind the expulsion threat, but he said that he doubted the government would change its position.

Richardson has argued that the travel ban will represent a “first step” and will indicate further penalties down the line if Iraq continues its current posture, which has resulted in the blocking of UNSCOM inspections for nearly two weeks. Few diplomats here know if there is any room for agreement on what can happen next if, as expected, Baghdad still refuses to comply.

The resolution on which the Council expects to vote Wednesday is a case in point. Language proposed by the United States that vaguely warned of “serious consequences” if Baghdad expels the U.S. nationals was removed after Russia, France and several other nations objected. Several Council diplomats have also emphasised that the United Nations must cool tensions to prevent any military threat.

At the same time, U.S. politicians are urging President Bill Clinton to move more forcefully against Iraq. Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi warned that, if Clinton decides to use force to settle the dispute, he would have to go beyond the “pin-prick attacks” of the 1993 and 1996 U.S. air strikes on Baghdad. Prime Minister Tony Blair also has put British jets on alert near the Persian Gulf.

Despite the military tensions in the region, U.N. officials still are pushing for a diplomatic solution, even though U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has conceded his mediation over the past week had not brought the desired response from Iraq. Annan maintained Monday that, if Iraq drops its expulsion threat and lets UNSCOM do its work, “it is logical that the Council give a hearing to a country that is on the receiving end of sanctions.”

So far, however, Aziz’s requests for a hearing of Iraqi grievances by the Council have been rebuffed.