Stumbling into Iraq


2/25/04


Guayaquil - Ecuador


After the 9/11 attacks, the USA created a big coalition of countries to support them in the Afghanistan war. Even though the war didn’t have the expected results, it was seen as a great success of diplomacy.


A year-and-a-half later it all changed when Bush was at it again, now against Iraq.


Now it was very different, the USA did not pay much attention to the diplomatic procedures to take before engaging in this new conflict.


There should not have to be as much opposition, considering the fact that there was a clear violation of the UN Security Council resolution and that Bush was not the only one to point out the imminent threat of Iraq’s WMD, as Clinton had already done it some time ago.


Many reasons caused the negative of the Security resolution, the different excuses given by the US government, the build-up of military forces around the Persian Gulf, the negative from the US to extend the deadline to the UN team in Iraq headed by Hans Blix and many others caused the members of the world community and most important, the members of the UN Security Council to say NO.



1

In the year 2002, the US had made a huge advance related to this matter in the Security Council, when they approved the resolution 1441 that commanded Iraq to destroy many of their long-range missiles and let the UN inspectors to enter Iraq to verify the probability of the creation of WMD. Many of the most important issues were left out of the discussions, such as the question if the USA would need a second resolution to invade Iraq or the 1441 would suffice? , This was never thought out carefully by the US diplomacy and it would turn out to be a very costly mistake.
Bush had many reasons besides the threats of WMD to invade Iraq, such as the elimination of a murderous dictatorial regime that could be the host for illegal groups and would probably have close links with Osama bin Laden, to make Saddam to take UN resolutions seriously as an example for the rest of the world and to bolster democracy in the middle east. But Bush had not given another example of bolstering democracy elsewhere, why didn’t they bolster democracy in Saudi Arabia, being such a friendly country.


The members of the Permanent Security Council and of the transitory council represented the opinions of the world, and they saw a US eager to go to war with or without resolution.


The troops were lining up the Arabian Sea, weeks after the decision in the UN.


The only thing that the members of the S.C. wanted was an extension of 4 to 9 months in the deadline, so that the UN weapons inspectors would have time to present proper information to back-up the decision of the S.C.


The world certainly didn’t need the mockery of Rumsfeld and the flaws of Dick Chenney, pressuring the countries to take the “proper” resolution and blackmailing them with those famous phrases that even today we gladly remember such as: “YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR AGAINST US”, certainly it was not very well taken by the members of the S.C.


Finally, when the USA decided to take the procedures to get the second resolution approved by the UN, as a personal petition of Tony Blair, they saw it crash it down when Paris, Berlin and Moscow joined together in the idea that with the inspectors Iraq was not in the position of making new or even using old WMD.



2

The European countries regard international law as of vital importance in their every day existence, but as they knew it very well, Bush was not a fan of these international treaties, as he showed it with the annulment of the Kyoto Protocol, the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, the Comprehensive Test Ban treaty, the Biological weapons convention, the international criminal court waiver to US soldier and finally the declaration of Rumsfeld of not using the Geneva treaty for the captured soldiers in Guantanamo base.
The worrying thing was that the members of the R.S.C. didn’t event get a visit from Collin Powell to try to sell them their agenda, and as a result they didn’t even get