Global Policy Forum

The Bush administration's "final" UN security council draft resolution on Iraq, now under frantic discussion, is a dangerous document. The official US objective, at least for the purpose of the UN negotiations, is disarmament of the Iraqi regime or, to be more precise, the verifiable destruction of its weapons of mass destruction and associated military delivery systems. This basic aim was reiterated by Tony Blair yesterday and is consistent with British policy going back to the Gulf war. Proliferation of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and their possible acquisition by tyrannical or unstable regimes is a matter of global concern predating September 11. In the case of Iraq, Saddam Hussein continues to defy WMD-related resolutions pertaining specifically to that country. All peaceful efforts to prevent proliferation - in general and in particular - and to uphold the UN's authority are fully deserving of public support.

By including a series of demands unrelated to Iraq's weaponry, however, the US draft resolution deliberately complicates this otherwise clear-cut issue. Saddam is enjoined to suspend all support for terrorism, broadly defined. He is told to stop persecuting his own people and to account for several hundred foreign nationals, mostly Kuwaitis, missing since 1991. The draft insists that Iraq must end its lucrative circumventions of UN sanctions, especially its oil smuggling. There are other provisions, too, and while they are consistent with previous UN directives, they have little or nothing to do with disarmament. Indeed, they may actually serve to delay or obstruct that process. Their fulfilment is in fact unmeasurable and unenforceable in the shorter term, in the absence of a full-scale external takeover of the Iraqi government. The US certainly knows this.

This consideration raises in turn well-founded doubts about US intentions. George Bush has recently suggested that if Iraq were to meet fully its old and new obligations, regime change could be deemed to have been achieved in Baghdad, even if Saddam retained power. He has taken to emphasising that war is not inevitable, that the threat of force is in effect a diplomatic tool. Yet as the White House daily reminds the world, Saddam's overthrow remains stated US policy. Its military build-up proceeds apace. Yesterday, US and British planes attacked again in the north. For all the optimistic talk of a softening of the US position, it is hard not to conclude that the UN is still being asked to endorse a pre-emptive war of conquest in which disarmament plays only a part.

While the war-triggering phrase, "all necessary means", has reportedly been dropped, the resolution's references to "material breach" and "serious consequences" may amount to much the same thing in practice. The draft sets a series of daunting hurdles over which Saddam, even if he were able and willing to cooperate fully, will in all likelihood trip. It establishes a time-line, starting with a mere seven days for Iraq's full acquiescence, that includes Iraq's publication within 30 days of a full inventory of all the weapons it says it does not possess. It allows only 45 days for inspections. The US warns, meanwhile, of its "zero tolerance" for any Iraqi obstructionism, of which it will be the judge, and that it reserves the right to take unilateral action at any time. To pass this resolution as drafted would be to approve future US actions that may quickly extend far beyond the primary aim of disarmament. Even at this late stage, Britain should publicly join France and Russia in insisting that the US sticks to the point.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.