NYTimes.com Article: Powell, in Europe, Nearly Dismisses U.N.'s Iraq Rep

This article from NYTimes.com 
has been sent to you by threehegemons@aol.com.


"There was little indication that Mr. Powell had changed the minds of people at 
the World Economic Forum, which assembles a rarefied fraternity of government 
leaders, business executives and other notables. The audience applauded the 
loudest for those who rose to condemn American policy."

Keep in mind that what is being described is a gathering of the capitalist 
elite and their friends.


Steven Sherman


threehegemons@aol.com


Powell, in Europe, Nearly Dismisses U.N.'s Iraq Report

January 27, 2003
By MARK LANDLER and ALAN COWELL 




 

DAVOS, Switzerland, Jan. 26 - Secretary of State Colin L.
Powell came close to dismissing a crucial United Nations
report on Iraq weapons today on the eve of the report's
publication, and said the United States would go to war
against Iraq alone if its divided European allies would not
join the fight. 

While Mr. Powell promised that the Bush administration
would study the findings of the report when it is submitted
on Monday, he indicated that it would be useless to give
the weapons inspectors more time. 

Bringing the case for military action to a deeply skeptical
audience of political, business and religious leaders at a
conference in the Swiss Alps, Mr. Powell said Saddam
Hussein of Iraq had "repeatedly violated the trust of the
United Nations, his people and his neighbors." He renewed
an administration contention that Mr. Hussein had ties to
Al Qaeda terrorists. [Excerpts, Page A8.] 

His remarks at the conference, the annual World Economic
Forum, deepened a sense of inevitability among people here
about a conflict. Speaking after Mr. Powell, King Abdullah
of Jordan said the prospects for a peaceful resolution were
fading. 

"We are a bit `too little, too late' to see a diplomatic
solution," said the king, whose land borders Iraq. "Let us
hope that whatever happens between Iraq and the
international community is as quick and painless as
possible." 

Though the United States had hoped to forge a consensus
among its allies, Mr. Powell said, the lack of a coalition
would not deter the Bush administration. "When we feel
strongly about something, we will lead, we will act, even
if others are not prepared to join us," he said. 

By promising to study the report and consult with other
members of the Security Council before acting, the
secretary made a modest concession to the qualms of
Europeans about what many here describe as Washington's
stampede toward war. 

But he also recited a litany of failures and unanswered
questions in Iraq's cooperation with the inspectors, who
have been looking for biological, chemical and nuclear
weapons in Iraq for two months. 

"To those who say, why not give the inspection process more
time, I ask, how much more time does Iraq need to answer
these questions?" Mr. Powell said. 

"We're in no great rush to judgment tomorrow or the day
after, but clearly time is running out," he said. "We will
not shrink from war if that is the only way to rid Iraq of
its weapons of mass destruction." 

Mr. Powell's speech is part of a campaign by the White
House, culminating in President Bush's State of the Union
address on Tuesday, to rally public opinion at home and
abroad. While the secretary did not produce new evidence of
Iraqi weapons, he insisted that the burden of proof was on
Mr. Hussein, not the inspectors, to give an accounting of
Baghdad's munitions. 

Administration officials declined to say what time line
they have in mind for a decision about any invasion. 

European diplomats suggested that they would continue to
press for more time for the inspectors. Speaking on the ABC
News program "This Week," Javier Solana, the European
Union's foreign policy chief, said that if Hans Blix, the
head of the chemical and biological weapons inspection
team, asked the Security Council for more time when he
submitted his report on Monday, he should get it. 

"I don't think that we are talking about an infinite amount
of time," Mr. Solana said. "Time has been given to Saddam
Hussein before. So we are talking about a question of
weeks, perhaps months." 

Speaking on French television, the French foreign minister,
Dominique de Villepin, called for an extension of the
inspections for "several weeks, or for a few months." 

Asked for evidence to back up Mr. Powell's assertion that
Mr. Hussein has "clear ties" to Al Qaeda and other
terrorist groups, Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief
of staff, said on "Fox News Sunday" that the Iraqi leader
"has had a history of a relationship with terrorist
organizations in the past, and it would be horrible if his
weapons of mass destruction got into the hands of
terrorists." 

Mr. Card was asked on another program, the NBC News "Meet
the Press," about reports that the United States was
prepared to use nuclear weapons if need be against Iraq. He
answered, "Should Saddam Hussein have any thought that he
would use a weapon of mass destruction, he should
anticipate that the United States will use whatever means
necessary to protect us and the world from a holocaust." 

Even as the administration struggles with its allies, it is
also facing pressure at home to go slow in confronting
Iraq. 

Mr. Powell's speech did little to change the view of the
Democratic leadership in Congress that Mr. Bush is acting
in "a very precipitous way," as Senator Tom Daschle, the
minority leader, put it today on the CBS News program "Face
the Nation." 

There was little indication that Mr. Powell had changed the
minds of people at the World Economic Forum, which
assembles a rarefied fraternity of government leaders,
business executives and other notables. The audience
applauded the loudest for those who rose to condemn
American policy. 

Still, at a meeting marked by relentless antagonism toward
Washington, Mr. Powell offered a muscular, unapologetic and
at times emotional defense of the nation's exercise of
power. 

"I don't think I have anything to be ashamed of, or
apologize for, with respect to what America has done for
the world," he said in response to a question asking why
the United States always falls back on the use of "hard
power" instead of the "soft power" of diplomacy. 

Mr. Powell noted that the United States had sent its
soldiers into foreign wars over the last century, most
recently in Afghanistan, without having imperial designs on
the territories it secured. 

"We've put wonderful young men and women at risk, many of
whom have lost their lives," he said, his voice growing
hoarse. "We've asked for nothing but enough land to bury
them in." 

At other moments, his tone was more conciliatory. He
acknowledged the split between the United States and two
key European allies, France and Germany, which last week
said they would oppose military action now. Mr. Powell
likened it to the bumps in a marriage. 

"One or two of our friends, we have been in marriage
counseling with for over 225 years nonstop," he said. "And
yet the marriage is intact, remains strong, will weather
any differences that come along." 

Still, the speech laid bare stark differences in how
Europe, Arab nations and the United States view the threat
from Iraq. 

King Abdullah said he was "concerned that we are being
diverted onto another track" by the crisis in Iraq,
distracting attention from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
as the main hurdle to regional peace. 

That theme was taken up by Prince Turki al-Faisal al-Saud,
a member of the Saudi royal house, who said American policy
- seen in the Arab world as pro-Israel - was the principal
reason for Arab hostility toward Washington. 

A poll of the audience conducted during a panel debate
found that 81 percent believed a war with Iraq was
inevitable. Fifty-six percent said it would drag on for six
months and ignite urban warfare in Baghdad. 

Earlier, the former archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey,
confronted Mr. Powell, saying the American insistence on
military power had created "a credibility gap of trust in
American politicians, and it's a very grave problem." 

A Dutch banker, Hubertus Heemskerk, seemed to speak for
many in the audience when he challenged Mr. Powell to
produce evidence of Iraq's transgressions before going to
war. 

"I think the evidence is there, the evidence is clear," Mr.
Powell replied. He said the United States would present
more evidence of Iraqi weapons programs "in the days and
weeks ahead." 

The White House may not be helped by the International
Atomic Energy Agency, which assisted in weapons inspections
in Iraq, and said today that it would not produce a
"smoking gun" in its report. 

Mr. Powell, however, argued that Security Council
Resolution 1441 placed the onus on Iraq to "come clean" by
disclosing its weapons, rather than obliging the inspectors
to root out arms in a country "the size of California." 

"This is not about inspectors finding smoking guns," he
said. 

The British head of Amnesty International, Irene Khan, was
applauded when she questioned whether the Iraq threat
"risks provoking a massive humanitarian and human rights
catastrophe." 

Mr. Powell said the United States was "sensitive to the
plight of the Iraqi people, not only in case of conflict
but also right now." 

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/27/international/middleeast/27IRAQ.html?ex=1044638089&ei=1&en=1fbebeb73b18c520



HOW TO ADVERTISE
---------------------------------
For information on advertising in e-mail newsletters 
or other creative advertising opportunities with The 
New York Times on the Web, please contact
onlinesales@nytimes.com or visit our online media 
kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo

For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
help@nytimes.com.  

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company