Jinn of Current Events

There still are people who claim that there is no international support (or close to zero support) for the US-led liberation of Iraq. Such statements are completely wrong and unreasonably dismissive of the UK, Australia, Israel, Spain, Italy, Denmark, Netherlands, the Czech republic, Poland, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Kosovo, the Vilnius Ten, South Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Qatar, etc. In fact, an overwhelming majority of European countries have joined the coalition of the willing to liberate Iraq (21 vs 5 at last count, ignoring "neutral" cowards).

Granted, North Korea, Syria, Iran, France, Zimbabwe, Cuba, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Belgium, Sudan, Sweden, Red China, and Russia are opposing the liberation of Iraq, but that is neither surprise nor impediment. One doesn't expect much better from dictatorships, supporters of terrorism, knee-jerk anti-Americans, and people who seek to profit from multi-billion contracts with tyrants. In particular, France has played its cards, boldly and badly; they lost. 

Swedish Prime Minister Göran Persson (social-democrat) opines that the UN should intervene and protect Iraq against an attack by the USA and UK, but he is worried that these two countries would veto any such resolution. He hasn't thought through the idea of suing President Bush and Prime Minister Blair for crimes against humanity, but he promises to reflect upon it. Finally, he wants Iraq, when liberated, to come under control of the UN, so as not to be a protectorate of the US.

Hey Persson, how about a US occupation of Iraq? To refresh your memory, if you ever studied the subject, here were MacArthur's major achievements during the occupation of Japan, from 1945 to 1951: destruction of military power, punishment of war criminals, establishment of representative government, adoption of federal constitution, enfranchisement of women, free market, free press, and decentralisation. Sounds like heaven compared to the impoverished social-democratic Welfare Kingdom of Sweden, doesn't it?

Meanwhile, Persson's compatriot Hans Blix pontificates: Some people care about their reputation even after death. He argues that Saddam cares so much about his reputation that he would not use his WMD against the US+UK forces of liberation. That's right, this is the world according to Blix: systematic torture, widespread murder, gas attacks against civilians, invasion of neighbouring countries, missiles against Israel — that's building a reputation; however, using chemical weapons against US+UK troops would destroy Saddam's reputation. A man who is so obviously unable to reason was chosen to lead disarmament inspections? 

Wondering where Umm Qasr is, and why the US Marines and British 1st Armored Division have just advanced into Iraq in the direction of that key naval port? (hint: close to Kuwait)

The Perry-Castañeda Library, Map Collection (University of Texas) is your friend to monitor the progress of the liberation in Iraq: The following maps were produced by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, unless otherwise indicated. Recommended selection:

• shaded relief: roads, railroads, main cities from the CIA Atlas of the Middle East (1993, 580k, scale 1:6,430,000)
• relief and main towns (1999, 323KB)
• special reference graphic: airfields, roads, railroads (2003, 608KB, scale 1:1,250,000)
• oilfields and facilities (1992, 182K)

 

Reason and Liberty will prevail. Bajram Rexhepi, Prime Minister of Kosovo: Today the world is faced with the age-old question: Do we stand united in the face of evil, or do we close our eyes and hope for the best? We Kosovars stand with the forces of freedom. We know that when confronting evil, there is no compromise. And so, in the coming conflict with Saddam Hussein, we stand with you, America. We are here to tell you that your sacrifices for the cause of human freedom are remembered. 

Tony Blair: And let us recall: what was shocking about September 11 was not just the slaughter of the innocent; but the knowledge that had the terrorists been able to, there would have been not 3,000 innocent dead, but 30,000 or 300,000 and the more the suffering, the greater the terrorists' rejoicing. ... [The September 11 massacre] has changed the psychology of America. It should have changed the psychology of the world. Of course Iraq is not the only part of this threat. But it is the test of whether we treat the threat seriously. 

Tony Blair: We consulted the inspectors and drew up five tests based on the document they published on 7 March. Tests like interviews with 30 scientists outside of Iraq; production of the anthrax or documentation showing its destruction.

The inspectors added another test: that Saddam should publicly call on Iraqis to cooperate with them. So we constructed this framework: that Saddam should be given a specified time to fulfil all six tests to show full cooperation; that if he did so the inspectors could then set out a forward work programme and that if he failed to do so, action would follow.

So clear benchmarks; plus a clear ultimatum. I defy anyone to describe that as an unreasonable position.

Last Monday, we were getting somewhere with it. We very nearly had majority agreement and I thank the Chilean President particularly for the constructive way he approached the issue.

There were debates about the length of the ultimatum. But the basic construct was gathering support.

Then, on Monday night, France said it would veto a second resolution whatever the circumstances. Then France denounced the six tests. Later that day, Iraq rejected them. Still, we continued to negotiate.

Last Friday, France said they could not accept any ultimatum. On Monday, we made final efforts to secure agreement. But they remain utterly opposed to anything which lays down an ultimatum authorising action in the event of non-compliance by Saddam.

Just consider the position we are asked to adopt. Those on the security council opposed to us say they want Saddam to disarm but will not countenance any new resolution that authorises force in the event of non-compliance.

That is their position. No to any ultimatum; no to any resolution that stipulates that failure to comply will lead to military action.

So we must demand he disarm but relinquish any concept of a threat if he doesn't. From December 1998 to December 2002, no UN inspector was allowed to inspect anything in Iraq. For four years, not a thing.

What changed his mind? The threat of force. 

Claudia Rosett (WSJ): If you really believe that all human beings--including those behind the many veils of the Middle East--are created equal, and endowed with a desire for life, liberty and happiness, then you also have to believe that pursuit of enlightened governance in the region is not simply a pet project of the White House. Confined within the tyrannies of such places as Iran and Syria, Lebanon, Libya and Saudi Arabia, are powerful forces for freedom. To understand that basic truth is to take a vital step toward a better, safer world.