| Submit your comments on this article | ||||
| Iraq | ||||
| Blair sets out final terms to avoid war | ||||
| 2003-03-09 | ||||
| Unlike the UN, 'final' means final to Tony. Saddam Hussein is to be given a 'final and non-negotiable' list of weapons he must destroy or account for within six days to prevent a devastating onslaught from American and British forces. In a stark outline of the endgame for Iraq, Britain and the US are to publish a set of disarmament 'trip-points' detailing specific weapons in his arsenal that the United Nations has listed in a private report to the Security Council circulated this weekend. Lessee: Monday is the 10th, 10 + 6 = the, um, ... With the international community seemingly split on whether the Iraqi dictator should be given more time to comply with resolution 1441, British officials told The Observer that the targets would be based on the UN report by Hans Blix, the head of the weapons inspectors. I might slip a few other things into the list. How about, for starters, every mobile lab in Iraq? Tony Blair hopes that by relying on evidence supplied by the UN itself to push through the vital second resolution on war, Britain and America will avoid accusations that they will act against Iraq whatever the UN says. He also wants to head off a growing rebellion of backbench MPs and the threat of resignation by up to 30 Ministers if no second resolution is achieved. The backbench rebellion is a real concern; the Ministers? Be gone with them. Last night a number of junior Ministers were named as being ready to resign if there was no second resolution. Anne Campbell, Parliamentary Private Secretary to Patricia Hewitt, the Trade Secretary, Andy Reed, aide to Margaret Beckett, the Environment Secretary, and Michael Jabez Foster, who works for Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, have all said they would consider their position. More than 200 backbench MPs are also likely to rebel if a vote is taken in the Commons on conflict with Iraq without a second resolution.
That time was here months ago, but okay. 'We believe the Blix process is now complete,' the Prime Minister's official spokesman said. 'There is not full and immediate compliance [by Iraq]. We want to emphasise that this can still be resolved peacefully if Saddam Hussein decides to disarm. He is only going to make that decision if he believes that this time it is really different.'
Does this mean that Putin won't veto if the resolution doesn't explicitly authorize war? Hmmmm ... The position of the two permanent members of the Security Council, which both have the power of the veto, is supported by Germany and
There's the money paragraph. We're doing this for Tony. And Dr Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told the Today programme that Saddam had to demonstrate a 'dramatic' change in attitude. 'Clearly the ball is very much in Iraq's court,' ElBaradei said. 'I hope that Iraq understands that they need to have a dramatic change in their attitude to demonstrate to the international community that they are fully, actively co-operating in providing evidence that they do not have chemical and biological weapons.' Looks like the 17th, unless Sammy pulls a rabbit out of his hat. | ||||
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #2 Ian Duncan Smith, you're about to get a small promotion... |
| Posted by: Brian 2003-03-09 12:34:44 |
| #1 Saddam will throw Blixie a bone and The frogs will say"See the inspections are working". Everybody knows Blixie/Bairadae are either incomptant or have thier own agenda. We also know the only reason Saddam gives up even 1 weapon is because of American/British weapons pointed at his head. |
| Posted by: raptor 2003-03-09 07:00:26 |