POLITICS-IRAQ: War Drums Beat Louder

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Nov 11 1998 (IPS) - The United SDtates stepped up the pressure on Iraq Wednesday, threatening to use force if the political standoff continued after the departure of U.N. weapons inspectors.

President Bill Clinton warned that “a failure to respond could embolden Saddam to act recklessly.” earlier Wednesday the United Nations pulled out its weapons inspectors and 130 other “non- essential” personnel after receiving a warning that U.N. staff in Baghdad could face danger.

Richard Butler, chairman of the U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) that monitors Iraq’s weaponry said he was “obliged to act quickly…because of the strong recommendation that had been put to me that could have an impact on the safety of our people.”

Butler admitted that U.S. officials had delivered the recommendation and did not specify what threat the UNSCOM and other personnel were facing. He pointed, however, to “an atmosphere that was increasingly hostile” in Iraq, including accusations by Baghdad that a non-American member of the weapons team was involved in espionage activities.

Butler said that UNSCOM and the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors Iraq’s nuclear programme, could return within 24 hours from their current post in Bahrain if conditions were right.

U.N. officials said that they expected the departure of the 103 inspectors and 130 staffers – including those working to distribute humanitarian aid and to allow limited oil sales as part of a deal with Iraq – would be temporary.

U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard emphasised that the “oil-for-food” deal would proceed, even as many of the U.N. officials working on that and on other humanitarian projects relocate temporarily to Amman, Jordan.

In Washington, Clinton gave a less hopeful reading of the growing crisis with Iraq as he spoke at Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia on Veterans’ Day, the U.S. holiday commemorating those killed in world wars.

“The international community is united that (Iraqi President) Saddam (Hussein) must not have it both ways by keeping his weapons of mass destruction and still getting rid of sanctions,” he contended.

“All of us agree that we prefer to resolve this crisis peacefully but if the inspectors are not permitted to visit suspect sites, or monitor compliance at known (weapons) production facilities, they may as well be in Baltimore, not Baghdad.”

UNSCOM’s fractious relationship with Iraq soured anew when Baghdad froze cooperation with the inspectors on Aug. 5, refusing to allow them to make surprise inspections of suspected weapons sites. The Iraqi government raised the heat at the end of October by halting all UNSCOM inspections, leaving the team with little to do besides changing videotapes and checking cameras positioned at declared weapons sites.

In both cases, Iraq cited frustration with UN-imposed sanctions for its decision.

The Iraqi moves surprised the United Nations, which had pushed for a review of all relations with Iraq and had been hinting at an easing of the eight-year-old international sanctions regime.

“The decision by the Iraqi leadership to cease cooperation with UNSCOM at the moment the Security Council increased its (diplomatic) efforts surprised me, and did the same I suppose for all Council members,” U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan conceded Wednesday.

Nevertheless, although Iraq’s halting of cooperation irritated even such normally friendly countries as Russia and France, the 15- nation Security Council remained divided on how to respond. The Council last week urged Iraq to cooperate with UNSCOM, but did not authorise any nation to use force – and Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov, in particular, has warned all sides to avoid any military standoff.

Butler’s withdrawal of the inspectors complicated the fragile situation.

On the one hand, the UNSCOM chief’s warnings about the safety of his staff casts a dim light on Iraq, which has denied threatening or seeking to expel the inspectors. On the other, it makes it easier for the United States to launch attacks without worrying about many possible repercussions for U.N. personnel.

No-one here appeared to rule out the possibility of a diplomatic solution, although Annan – who cancelled a tour of Maghreb countries Wednesday to return to U.N. headquarters – voiced dismay at the lack of success in negotiating a solution with Iraq.

Some 41 U.N. officials – including some humanitarian staff and special envoy Prakash Shah, who has kept up talks with the Iraqi leadership – will remain in Iraq for now. Many Council member states, notably China and Russia, are also insisting for a greater U.N. diplomatic role to avert a possible unilateral strike by the United States.

Still, Washington clearly could attack Iraq more easily now than during the previous standoffs over UNSCOM.

Clinton, beset by an impeachment drive stemming from his affair with former White House intern Monica Lewinsky, has been strengthened by his Democratic Party’s election gains last week which blunted the Republicans drive for impeachment.

Consequently, an attack on Iraq – which would have been dismissed by the Republicans as political opportunism mere days ago – may no longer hurt Clinton domestically, analysts said. Internationally, Washington’s caution against attacking Iraq when the crisis began in August also had paid off by helping it to paint Baghdad as the villain in the current standoff.

Although Arab states and Russia were still wary of any attack, there were few signs of the opposition to U.S. military plans that were apparent in February, when only last-minute talks between Annan and Saddam Hussein averted U.S. missile strikes.