POLITICS-IRAQ: New Threat of Air Strikes on Iraq

By Farhan Haq Reprint | | Print |

UNITED NATIONS, Dec 16 1998 (IPS) - Iraq faced the renewed threat of U.S. air strikes Wednesday after the chief United Nations weapons inspector issued a report saying Baghdad continued to refuse to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors.

In Washington, U.S. President Bill Clinton huddled with his security advisors while in Iraq, 120 U.N. weapons inspectors pulled out of the country. Earlier, Clinton discussed the latest crisis by telephone with British Prime Minister Tony Blair who declared that the United States and Britain had the “necessary legal authority” should they choose to use force.

In the span of only a few days, Iraq’s hopes for a U.N. review of sanctions which might end the eight-year-old embargo against the nation disqappeared dramatically as the threat of western action appeared a real possibility.

That abrupt turnaround – the latest in a series of reversals in relations between Iraq and the United Nations came after Richard Butler, the chairman of the U.N. Special Commission (UNSCOM) which monitors Iraq’s disarmament, reported Tuesday night that Baghdad had not kept its promises to the world body.

On Nov. 14, Iraq agreed to allow unhindered UNSCOM inspections in a bid to avert U.S. missile attacks – which Clinton already had ordered but then called off. In his report late Tuesday, Butler concluded that “Iraq did not provide the full cooperation it promised on Nov. 14.”

Instead, “Iraq initiated new forms of restrictions upon the Commission’s work … Iraq’s conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in either the fields of disarmament or accounting for its prohibited weapons programmes,” Butler said.

His tough evaluation all but ended any immediate Iraqi hopes for a U.N. Security Council review of disarmament compliance and sanctions, which many Council diplomats believed could be held next month. But it also prompted harsh reminders from U.S. and British officials that any failure to make good on the promises of cooperation with UNSCOM could invite a new, and unannounced, attack on Iraq.

“I can only say that all options are on the table, including the military option, as far as the United States is concerned,” U.S. State Department spokesman James Foley said. “And that is not an issue, in our view, that requires debate, let alone determination, in the Security Council.”

Butler told reporters Wednesday that all UNSCOM and International Atomic Energy Agency staff has left Iraq by plane and road late Tuesday night, explaining that “they are not able to do their work adequately and therefore I removed them.”

Butler did not cite any safety concerns among his reasons for pulling out the weapons inspectors. But U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan confirmed that U.S. Ambassador Peter Burleigh had announced the departure of U.S. civilian personnel in the region and had also “advised Butler to withdraw UNSCOM”.

Annan added that all U.N. humanitarian personnel have been regrouped “for their own safety, in one location in Baghdad”.

The sudden movements in the region, where a large contingent of U.S. forces have remained deployed since November, fuelled fresh speculation that a U.S. attack was near. Other parallels with previous U.S. build-ups, including a warning to U.S. citizens not to travel in the region, added to the crisis.

Other factors, however, needed to be consider, political observers said.

With the approach of Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting set to begin on Friday, Washington has a limited time-frame to attack Iraq before it draws the ire of Muslim nations.

More importantly, with Clinton facing an impeachment vote in the House of Representatives Thursday, he is not as politically able to call for an attack without drawing criticism for its timing, both around the world and from members of his Republican opposition.

U.S. support among Arab nations for an attack, which had peaked in November after Iraq briefly ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, has ebbed. Israeli Prime Minister Binjamin Netanyahu’s decision to suspend a planned withdrawal of troops from Palestinian territory, and Clinton’s inability to prompt him to budge during a visit to Israel this week, did little to mollify Arab leaders about a new U.S.-Iraq standoff.

Annan, noting the increasing division between the United States and the rest of the U.N. membership on Iraq, urged this week that, if Iraq complies with disarmament demands, sanctions will be lifted.

Butler’s report crushed those hopes as he argued there was “clear evidence that Iraq had taken advance actions” to empty suspected weapons sites of any incriminating evidence before the inspectors arrived. The headquarter of the Special Security Organisation “had been emptied of any relevant materials.”

His report cited last week’s blocking of UNSCOM inspectors from the headquarters of Iraq’s ruling Baath Party, when Iraqi officials “introduced various new requirements, including a formal letter of request, indicating what was being sought at the site”. Also, Butler contended, Iraq had failed to hand over requested documents detailing the use of chemical munitions during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.

Despite this grim assessment, Annan stressed some positive developments, calling the UNSCOM report “a mixed picture”. Annan cited a letter delivered Monday from Mohamed El-Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, saying that “the Iraqi counterpart has provided the necessary level of cooperation” for nuclear inspections.

The Security Council has three options, Annan argued in presenting Butler’s report Tuesday: It can decide there is no basis to proceed with a comprehensive review of Iraq’s compliance and the U.N. sanctions; it can give Iraq additional time to cooperate; or it “may wish to proceed with a comprehensive review” anyway.

Russia, Iraq’s main Council ally, clearly favour the third option. The United States just as strongly supports the first, as well as the threat of a unilateral U.S. attack. Many of the Council’s other 13 member states are in between, one U.N. diplomat told IPS.

The Council went into closed emergency session Wednesday to discuss the crisis with many members concerned about the possibility of an attack. Annan insisted last week that any military action would require Council approval but observers here believed that Clinton, battling his domestic problems, was unwilling to listen to further advice from other nations before he ordered a new strike.