NYTimes.com Article: U.S. Set to Demand That Allies Agree Iraq Is Defyin

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


Is it just me, or does that verb 'demand' not make any sense whatsoever?  How 
exactly do you 'demand' someone agree with you?  The US sounds more than ever 
like the proverbial insane/abusive boyfriend.

Steven Sherman

threehegemons@aol.com


U.S. Set to Demand That Allies Agree Iraq Is Defying U.N.

January 23, 2003
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN 




 

WASHINGTON, Jan. 22 - Bush administration officials said
today that next week they would confront France, Germany
and other skeptics of military action against Iraq by
requiring them to agree publicly that Iraq had defied the
United Nations Security Council. 

The officials, expressing exasperation with the refusal of
longtime allies to back the United States, said they were
vigorously debating whether to seek a second United Nations
resolution authorizing force against Iraq. At the least,
they said, they will demand that the nations opposed to the
American position acknowledge that Iraq has not complied
with resolutions on its weapons of mass destruction. 

Administration officials said their strategy was based on
the belief that there might never be a "smoking gun"
proving Iraq's possession of illegal weapons. Accordingly,
they acknowledged that the case must be made in a negative
fashion: that Iraq has failed to disprove the contentions
of the United States and others about its weapons of mass
destruction. The administration asserts, though without
offering evidence, that Iraq has thwarted inspectors by
hiding the weapons. 

Confronted today by recent polls indicating that Americans
are having second thoughts about a war, President Bush
condemned the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein. 

Labeling him "a dangerous, dangerous man with dangerous,
dangerous weapons," the president said in St. Louis that
"if Saddam Hussein will not disarm, the United States of
America and friends of freedom will disarm Saddam Hussein."


The Pentagon, meanwhile, announced that more than 20,000
members of the National Guard and Reserve had reported for
active duty this week. The activations brought to nearly
79,000 the number of National Guard members and Reservists
called to active duty for possible service in the Persian
Gulf or in the United States. A total American military
force of 150,000 is expected in the region by mid-February.


Some administration officials expressed the belief that
France and other reluctant allies, accepting American
military action as inevitable, would be won over in the end
- perhaps out of concern that their businesses might lose
any role in exploiting Iraq's oil. Others said the French
might ease their resistance if the United States allowed
the inspectors a few more weeks. 

But some were skeptical of these arguments, saying that the
French ought to be taken at their word, and that Mr. Bush
should not bother to seek a second resolution condemning
Iraq and authorizing the use of force. 

In another sign of their irritation with American allies,
aides to Mr. Bush said they were intensifying efforts to
line up support elsewhere in Europe and would try to
portray France and Germany as holdouts against a quick
Security Council indictment of Iraq. Officials said today
that support was forthcoming not only from Britain but also
from Poland, Spain, Italy and others. 

If anything, Americans officials said, the recent French
and German appeal for American patience has backfired -
emboldening the hawks in the administration and even
spurring Secretary of State Colin L. Powell to tell aides
that he would accept military action against Iraq without
approval from the Security Council. 

Mr. Powell has resisted that position for months. Sounding
tougher today than he has, he said on the PBS program "The
NewsHour With Jim Lehrer" that the question was whether to
allow Iraq "a few more weeks, a few more months" to comply
when it was clear already that it would never do so. 

"Frankly," he added, "there are some nations in the world
who would like simply to turn away from this problem,
pretend it isn't there." 

Mr. Powell's comments appeared to be a direct rebuttal of
the call for a delay of two or three months by the French
foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, with whom he has
talked frequently - some said tensely - since the weekend. 

Going further, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld
dismissed the German and French roles in a newly expanded
NATO, which has been asked to provide indirect assistance
for an Iraqi invasion. 

"You're thinking of Europe as Germany and France," Mr.
Rumsfeld told foreign journalists at the State Department,
as leaders of the two countries today solemnly celebrated
the 40th anniversary of their treaty of friendship in
Versailles, France. "I don't. I think that's old Europe."
He added: "You look at vast numbers of other countries in
Europe. They're not with France and Germany on this.
They're with the United States." 

In Paris, President Jacques Chirac of France and Chancellor
Gerhard Schröder of Germany, proclaimed their unity on the
matter. 

"We both want a peaceful solution to the crisis in Iraq,
and we will work toward that in close cooperation," Mr.
Schröder said today. 

The Iraqi situation appeared today to have been thrown into
some turmoil by the French and, to a lesser degree, by the
German rejections of American policy on Monday - and by the
publication of polls showing a drop in the number of
Americans supporting a war, and a vast majority of
Americans opposing action without the support of allies. 

Administration officials said that although both Mr. Chirac
and Mr. Schröder had called on the United States to slow
down its move toward war, the comments of their foreign
ministers on Monday at the United Nations were surprisingly
vehement. 

France had called for the special United Nations ministers'
meeting on Monday, ostensibly to discuss terrorism, and
many American officials expressed the opinion that Foreign
Minister de Villepin had somehow set Mr. Powell up and
surprised him with the vehement remarks. 

Asked by Mr. Lehrer if he felt "sandbagged" by the French,
Mr. Powell replied, "Well, I wouldn't say `sandbagged' is
the word." But he said it was "unfortunate" that Mr. de
Villepin transformed a meeting on terrorism into a forum on
Iraq. 

The administration is now planning to focus on the report
that the United Nations weapons inspections chief, Hans
Blix, is to issue on Monday - in the hope that it offers
details on Iraq's noncompliance. This could result in a
fresh United Nations demand that Iraq come clean and
dismantle its weapons. 

Noting today that French officials have in the past stated
publicly that Iraq has these weapons and has failed to
comply with the resolutions, officials said the Bush
administration thinks France and Germany can somehow be
embarrassed next week into repeating that acknowledgment. 

"Our goal is to rub their nose in reality, and then proceed
to discuss what we do about it," an official said,
referring to France. "We want to create a situation where
they have to respond to the obvious facts and then explain
why they don't want to act on them." 




American officials said one alternative strategy would be
for the United States to seek a Security Council resolution
only if France agreed to abstain rather than veto. France
has not vetoed a resolution favored by the United States
since a 1976 dispute over the Comoros Islands, off the
coast of Africa. 

"We haven't given up on the United Nations process," one
administration official said. "We'll just have to see what
happens." 

On the subject of delay, Mr. Blix seemed more more
deferential to the American position today than he did last
week, when he made calls for a prolonged inspections
process. Asked whether time was running out on Iraq, he
told reporters at the United Nations that that was up to
the Security Council to judge. 

He added that if Iraq were truly cooperating with the
inspections, there would be no reason for delay. 

Another element in the administration's strategy is to make
the Blix report a major element of President Bush's State
of the Union message on Tuesday. 

Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, notes in
an op ed article in The New York Times on Thursday that
many other countries besides Iraq have been asked to disarm
and have readily done so.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/23/international/middleeast/23IRAQ.html?ex=1044295103&ei=1&en=ab0d866d49456172



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