[Peace-discuss] NYTimes: France Warns U.S. It Will Not Back Early War on Iraq

[scarsey at uiuc.edu]

>France Warns U.S. It Will Not Back Early War on Iraq
>
>January 21, 2003
>By JULIA PRESTON 
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>UNITED NATIONS, Jan. 20 - In unusually blunt terms 
aimed at
>pre-empting the United States, France said today that it
>would not support any Security Council resolution for
>military action against Iraq in the coming weeks. 
>
>France's foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, 
accused
>Washington of "impatience" in the confrontation with
>Baghdad over illegal weapons and added, "We believe 
that
>nothing today justifies envisaging military action." 
>
>In a highly public rebuff, Mr. de Villepin would not rule
>out the possibility that France would use its veto power if
>the United States presses the Council later this month 
to
>authorize war against Iraq for failing to disarm. 
>
>But diplomats said that Mr. de Villepin had told Secretary
>of State Colin L. Powell in closed meetings that France
>would be more inclined to support war if United Nations
>weapons inspectors confirmed after another two 
months or so
>that Iraq was not willing to disarm peacefully. 
>
>Stark differences with Washington over the pace and
>effectiveness of the inspections were also expressed 
today
>by China, another veto-bearing Council nation, and 
Germany.
>China's foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, called a report
>that the inspectors will present to the Council on 
Monday a
>"new beginning," rather than a final accounting. 
>
>The German foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, said 
that the
>inspectors should have "all the time which is needed." 
>
>Mr. Powell seemed to be caught off guard by the 
resistance,
>especially the French broadside. It came during a 
meeting
>of the foreign ministers of 13 of the 15 Security Council
>countries, who were convened by France - as the 
Council
>president this month - to discuss ways to defeat global
>terrorism. 
>
>Departing from his prepared remarks Mr. Powell said 
the
>Council would have to "make a judgment" on Iraq's
>cooperation after the chief United Nations weapons
>inspectors give a report here next week on their work in
>Iraq. 
>
>He summoned the Council not to "shrink from the
>responsibilities" or be "shocked into impotence," 
although
>he stopped short of confirming that Washington would 
seek a
>resolution to authorize war. 
>
>In closed meetings on Sunday and today, Mr. de Villepin
>tried to convince Mr. Powell that Washington does not 
yet
>have a majority on the Council in favor of war, and that it
>should let the arms inspections run for two more 
months at
>least, diplomats said. 
>
>As pressure mounted here for more time for the 
inspections,
>Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld said in 
Washington
>that the United States' timetable for Iraq to disarm is
>very short, and "we're nearing the end of the long road." 
>
>In Baghdad, Iraqi authorities said they would comply 
with
>suggestions from Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, 
the chief
>weapons inspectors, and encourage Iraqi scientists to 
agree
>to private interviews with the arms teams. 
>
>Britain announced today that it is preparing 30,000 
troops
>for action in Iraq, in the most significant step yet in its
>military buildup. 
>
>Mr. de Villepin made his blunt comments at a news
>conference just moments after Mr. Powell addressed 
the
>Council, and continued to argue his case at a luncheon
>France held for the ministers. 
>
>"There is no reason to go to war while we can still 
improve
>the path of cooperation," Mr. de Villepin said in an
>interview late today. "We don't believe the world is
>ready." 
>
>Rather than waiting for the report on Monday, diplomats
>say, France decided to take a strong stand a week 
ahead of
>time in an effort to prevent the Bush administration from
>forcing the issue of Iraqi compliance in the Council at 
the
>end of this month, diplomats said. 
>
>Paris believes that President Saddam Hussein has 
been kept
>in check by the weapons inspectors who have fanned 
out
>across his country, and that he cannot continue work on
>building prohibited weapons while they are there. 
>
>Mr. de Villepin warned that if Washington did not win
>support in the Council and opted to go to war with only a
>handful of allies, it would be "a victory for the law of
>the strongest." 
>
>In his statement before the open meeting, Mr. Powell 
urged
>the Council to get ready to stand firm, repeating four
>times that "we must not shrink from our duties and
>responsibilities." 
>
>He provided no new details about how the Bush
>administration planned to proceed after the weapons
>inspectors' report. 
>
>"We are greatly concerned that a military strike against
>the regime in Baghdad would involve considerable and
>unpredictable risks for the global fight against
>terrorism," Mr. Fischer said. "These are fundamental
>reasons for our rejection of military action." 
>
>While other European countries were demanding more 
time,
>Britain, which has also been pleading in recent weeks 
to
>slow the rush toward war, changed its tone today. 
>
>"Let us also be clear that time is running out for 
Saddam
>Hussein," Jack Straw, the British foreign secretary, said
>today, echoing words that President Bush has spoken 
in
>recent days. 
>
>After Mr. Powell left New York, a senior administration
>official said that the secretary had been unruffled by the
>tough words, particularly from the French, but he 
indicated
>that Mr. Powell felt that the United States had its work
>cut out. 
>
>"This is not particularly new," the official said,
>acknowledging that there was a basic disagreement 
between
>the United States and France right now on whether the
>inspections in Iraq were achieving a positive result. 
>
>"There are those who think that somehow this is 
working,"
>the official said, making clear that this was not
>Washington's view. 
>
>The official said that despite Mr. de Villepin's strong
>words, the White House was hopeful that there would
>eventually be an agreement on what to do about Iraq,
>although it would require the kind of tough negotiating
>that led to the passage last November of Resolution 
1441,
>which set the terms for new inspections and demanded 
Iraqi
>disarmament. 
>
>"This is not the end of the debate," he said. "This is the
>start of the debate. When we get the report of the
>inspectors, then we will start going through that process
>with others." 
>
>The purpose of the open Security Council meeting today 
was
>to adopt a declaration to strengthen and accelerate
>measures that nations across the globe have taken to
>tighten financial, travel and police controls to fight
>terrorists. 
>
>But the antiterrorism agenda was almost eclipsed by 
the
>discussions behind closed doors about Iraq. 
>
>Mr. Powell did not make any new attempt to link
>Washington's battle against terrorism and its 
confrontation
>with President Hussein. 
>
>Only Mr. Straw made the connection, saying that 
stopping
>weapons proliferation by "rogue states" like Iraq was as
>urgent as fighting terrorism.
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/21/international/
middleeast/21IRAQ.html?ex=1044187219&ei=1&en=
480c5536401aed28
>
>
>
>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 at nytimes.com or visit our online media 
>kit at http://www.nytimes.com/adinfo
>
>For general information about NYTimes.com, write to 
>help at nytimes.com.  
>
>Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company