Global Policy Forum

By Anton LaGuardia

Will the discovery of chemical warheads in Iraq trigger a war? Those opposed to war will doubtless say it is a trivial find. But many others will see it as the "smoking gun" amounting to a "material breach" of the United Nations resolutions on disarmament, and proving the lie of Iraq's claim not to have any banned weapons.

The inspectors, who have in recent days adopted a much tougher tone, will play a key role in interpreting the importance of the find. Do the warheads point to the existence of a secret stock of chemical agent, or are they a quartermaster's oversight?

That was the line taken last night by Iraq, which claimed it had "forgotten" the munitions and thus omitted them from its 12,000-page declaration on its arms programmes made to the UN in December.

Under the terms of UN Security Council Resolution 1441, passed unanimously in November, inspectors are due to submit a full report on Iraq's compliance on Jan 27. But they will go back sooner if they regard the discovery as serious.

Resolution 1441 requires the inspectors "to report immediately to the council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations".

The Security Council would then meet "to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all the relevant council resolutions in order to secure international peace".

The resolution is ambiguous on the question of force. It does not give explicit approval for war, but neither does it require a second resolution to authorise military action.

Britain and America believe that the Security Council must approve a war to disarm and depose Saddam if there is a material breach. If the UN blocks actions, they reserve the right to take action alone. But Arab countries, and others opposed to war, are likely to make a final argument to delay military action, saying that the discovery of a "smoking gun" proves the inspectors are effective and can disarm Iraq.

Even before yesterday's discovery, America had argued that Iraq twice committed a "material breach" since the passage of Resolution 1441.

The first time was in November following Iraqi attacks on allied aircraft patrolling the "no-fly" zones, and the second was Iraq's December declaration which the United States said contained glaring omissions.

At the time, other members of the Security Council, Britain included, declined to echo the accusation.

Even if the inspectors decide that the warheads are insignificant, Iraq would remain under extreme pressure.America will point to the discovery of undeclared chemical munitions as another example of Iraq's "pattern" of non-compliance.

Iraq has allowed inspectors to work with unprecedented freedom - entering Saddam's palaces, visiting the bases of Iranian dissident groups and searching the homes of Iraqi scientists.

But there has been a growing chorus of demands, including from the inspectors themselves, that Iraq has to move from "passive" compliance to "active" co-operation if it wants to avert war.

In particular, Saddam has to account for the chemical and biological weapons, as well as the missiles and other means of delivering them, listed by the UN as unaccounted for when they left Iraq in 1998.

British officials will see the discovery of the warheads as a vindication of the UN.

If the warheads are a minor breach, Britain will nevertheless urge America to stick by the inspectors in the belief that they will, sooner or later, find the evidence that will damn Saddam.

If they are the "smoking gun", Britain will urge America to seek Security Council approval for military action.

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.