Associated Press Wire Story
March 2, 1998
United Nations, New York -- U.S.-British efforts to warn Iraq of ``very
severe consequences'' if it broke an arms inspection accord drew
strong opposition in the Security Council today. Opponents feared
the wording could be used to justify an automatic military strike.
The 15-member council met to consider a U.S.-backed resolution,
submitted by Britain and Japan, warning Iraq against violating the
agreement it reached with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan last
week.
``At this moment, there is no consensus in the Security Council,'' Costa Rican Ambassador Fernando Berrocal Soto told reporters. He said all members agreed on the need to send ``the strongest message'' to Iraq about honoring the agreement but ``it's a problem of automaticity.'' Arriving for the council meeting, British Ambassador John Weston said he remained ``hopeful we are going to get a unanimous resolution adopted today.''
But Russian Ambassador Sergey Lavrov said he expected some revisions to be offered to the British-Japanese text, which was circulated Friday. Asked what Russia would like to see in the resolution, Lavrov replied ``no automaticity.'' That meant the Russians, with the support of several of the 10 non-permanent members, wanted to make sure that the council -- and not Washington -- would decide if the agreement had been breached and whether force was appropriate.
``The effort that is being made now ... is to have some kind of language that somehow would reassure those of us who think it's absolutely necessary to have authorization of the Security Council'' before force is used, said Brazil's U.N. ambassador, Celso Luiz Amorim. The latest draft contains no explicit threat of an automatic military response against Iraq if it refuses to open up eight presidential compounds, which Baghdad had declared off-limits before making its deal with Annan.
In an effort to win unanimous support, the British changed the warning from ``severest consequences'' to ``very severe'' and removed an explicit reference to a 1991 resolution that threatened force if Iraq did not comply with U.N. inspections. It appeared, however, that the Russians, as well as the French and Chinese, wanted language ruling out such a move without council approval.
In an interview Sunday with ``CNN Late Edition,'' Iraq's U.N. ambassador, Nizar Hamdoon, said Baghdad would honor the accord worked out by Annan, which eased the immediate threat of a U.S.-led attack on Iraq to end the weapons standoff. But Hamdoon also said Iraq opposed open-ended and repeat inspections, even though no time limit is contained in the agreement with the secretary-general. ``I think that all the understanding was it should be within a reasonable time,'' Hamdoon said. ``I mean, this process cannot continue forever.''
He also told CNN that Iraq expected the diplomats to be in charge of the inspection teams, a comment that drew a sharp reply from Richard Butler, the chief U.N. weapons inspector. Butler told CNN it was ``perfectly clear'' in the accord that general responsibility was his, and that inspection reports would go from him through Annan to the Security Council. Today, however, Hamdoon said his remarks had been misinterpreted. ``I did not say that the diplomats would be in charge of it,'' Hamdoon said, referring to palace inspections. ``I said that the secretary-general will have an authority over the work of the team.''
The deal provides for a special group of U.N. inspectors and diplomats to inspect the palaces. The agreement stipulates that the special group will be headed by a U.N. official but that Butler's team retains operational control. A former inspector, David Kay, said on NBC's ``Meet the Press'' that the requirement to send diplomats along with inspectors would be ``a serious impediment to effective inspections.''
``Unless you surprise the Iraqis, you have no hope of finding anything,'' Kay said. ``They literally move things out the back door while you're at the front door. A diplomat there who wants to know why do you want to go into a school, a mosque, a hospital for amputees? Well, you want to go in because the Iraqis have moved things there. You explain it to the diplomats, you negotiate with the diplomats, the Iraqis are moving stuff out the back door.''
Before Annan left for Baghdad last week, the United States insisted that any agreement should neither limit the duration of the inspections nor rule out the possibility of repeat visits as long as the U.N. inspectors felt they were necessary. The inspectors are trying to determine whether Iraq has complied with orders, issued at the end of the Gulf War, to get rid of all long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction.
