Zero-hour approaches
The months and the weeks are over, and it's only a matter of days before America invades Iraq. Khaled Dawoud reports from Washington
Defying a strident, worldwide anti-war movement, the United States, Britain and Spain launched on Monday what amounts to the final countdown for the US-led war against Iraq. By presenting a one- page draft resolution to the United Nations Security Council, seeking confirmation that Iraq has not taken "the final opportunity" to disarm peacefully, US President George Bush's administration is leaving little doubt that the decision to go to war has been made. The expected date is sometime around mid-March.
In statements made on Monday, and shortly before the closed Security Council session in which the three countries presented their draft, Bush told reporters that he would work with members of the world body "in the days ahead to make it clear to [Iraqi President] Saddam [Hussein] that the demands of the world and the United Nations ... will be enforced."
France, Germany and Russia, who have been leading the "let the inspectors work" drive inside the Security Council, moved swiftly and presented a counter "memorandum", emphasising that Iraq could be disarmed through intensified inspections, and setting a timeline that would take months to implement.
Washington scoffed at the proposals put forward jointly by "old Europe" and Russia, and accused the three countries of misreading Resolution 1441. This, it said, was about Iraq's voluntary compliance, and not about inspectors searching for weapons intentionally hidden by Baghdad while denying their existence. If this is the approach, then Iraq has not complied, say US officials, and should therefore face the "serious consequences" referred to in Resolution 1441. US Secretary of State Colin Powell repeatedly reminded his audience that when all 15 members of the Security Council voted for that resolution on 7 November, they knew what "serious consequences" meant: military action.
US and British officials have also declared that they expected a vote on their draft during the second week of March, or shortly after Hans Blix -- the head of UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) -- publicly presents his first quarterly report to the Security Council on 7 March. Blix will hand in a written copy of his report on 1 March, the same date he wants Iraq to start destroying its Somoud-2 missiles. These missiles are proscribed by UNMOVIC because they exceed the 90-mile limit stated in earlier Security Council resolutions.
President Bush, in a joint news conference with Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar on Sunday, said destroying the missiles would not be enough to avoid forceful disarmament, adding that those missiles were "only the tip of an iceberg" and wondered why Iraq did not destroy them earlier. However, White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer later said that Washington still expected Iraq to destroy its missiles, and would consider its failure to do so a violation of UN resolutions. But if nothing satisfies the Bush administration, why should Iraq destroy its missiles, observers are wondering.
Meanwhile, US officials said they have already initiated "intense diplomacy" to convince members of the Security Council to vote in favour of the draft resolution. In political talk shows, US experts and analysts present charts and tables to determine how the United States can achieve what now seems like mission impossible, namely getting the backing of at least nine members of the Security Council, while at the same time preventing France, Russia or China -- all permanent members -- from using their veto power. All resolutions require a minimum of nine votes before being adopted by the Security Council.
After Blix and Mohamed Al-Baradie presented their latest update to the Council on 14 February, 11 out of the 15 Council members clearly stated they preferred to give time for inspectors to work, and saw no reason to rush into war. Only Spain, Bulgaria and Britain sided with the United States, while France, Russia, China, Germany and Syria came out as the strongest opponents. US officials said they remain hopeful that Pakistan, three African countries -- Angola, Cameroon and Guinea -- and Spanish-speaking Mexico and Chile would swing their vote and side with the draft resolution. Syria was the only non-permanent Security Council member which publicly announced on Sunday that it had been approached by the United States to swing its vote, and that it had refused to do so.
Top US officials were dispatched to visit countries with seats at the Security Council. US diplomats said they were asked to use "all diplomatic means possible" to win the votes of those countries. With Chile, it could be a preferential trade agreement; with Mexico, a lucrative aid package, and the same applies to the three African countries and Pakistan.
"In Africa, the message is simple: time is running out and we think they should support us," one US diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Associated Press. Another diplomat added, "the order from the White House was to use 'all diplomatic means necessary.' And that really means everything." Mexican officials made no secret of the fact that they were also being subject to immense pressure by the US, and not diplomatically. "They actually told us, any country that doesn't go along with us will pay a very heavy price," a Mexican diplomat was quoted by AP.
US officials hope that by getting nine votes, France, Russia and China would abstain and refrain from using their veto power. Knowing that the US would go to war even without Security Council approval, the three countries are likely to reconsider their position and think of post-war gains rather than a confrontation with the world's sole superpower, US officials hope.
Officials said they would also talk to major world countries that could have an influence on smaller members of the Security Council. In his Asian tour this week, Secretary of State Powell made a stop in China to appeal to its leader to abstain from voting instead of opposing the US draft. And he also made a stop in Japan, which manages major aid programmes for the three African members of the Council. Bush also sought Spain's Aznar help to convince Mexico's government to ease its opposition to the US stand on Iraq, but the Spanish premier was unable to deliver good news to Bush.
Besides presenting a draft resolution to the Security Council, Pentagon officials also revealed that a secret two-day meeting, attended by more than 100 US officials, was held this weekend to discuss food aid, reconstruction and the civil administration of post-Saddam Iraq. Officials added that representatives of US allies in the war against Iraq were also present at the meetings held in Washington on Saturday and Sunday. The participants were members of a new office attached to the White House and chaired by the Pentagon. The Office of Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance will coordinate with the US Central Commander, General Tommy Franks, who is likely to be the de-facto military ruler until the United States decides it is suitable to hand over government affairs to Iraqis. Retired Army Lieutenant General Jay Garner, who gained previous experience in humanitarian relief operations in northern Iraq in 1991, leads the new office. Members of that office will soon move to Qatar, where General Franks will set up his command overlooking military operations.
