President Bush talked to the General Assembly of the UN on September 12, 2002. He asked the Security Council to require Iraq to accept the weapon inspectors within a clear deadline. If the answer is negative, he said that the UN should authorise a military action against Iraq. He added that if the UN Security Council failed to follow his suggestion, the USA reserved its right to invade Iraq on its own. At the same time the US is building up their military presence in the Gulf.
In September 2002 the US and Britain proposed the draft of a resolution. This resolution, if adopted, would give an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein to let the inspectors in without restriction; Iraq would have seven days for giving the complete list of all its weapons, and 23 days to let the inspectors in the country. If the Iraqis do not comply, any action, including war, would be allowed. France said immediately that it would not go along with that text. President Chirac wants a simpler resolution telling Iraq to let the inspectors in within a well-defined period of time without restriction or condition. If Iraq does not comply, then in a second time the Security Council would adopt another resolution authorising, or not, the use of military force. Russia, China, and many other countries including Germany, are close to the French proposal, with Russia even saying that no new resolution is required, and that the old ones will do.
And now Mexico dares to join the French and the Russians at the UN Security Council. According to the USA, none of their poor relations should have any personal opinion; they should only follow and repeat what the Master says. The docile US media -The Wall Street Journal- suggests that the US should forget the problem of the Mexican immigrants illegally in the US, a problem that Bush promised to solve, and that he since has forgotten. Mexico going along with the French and Russians is seen in Washington as a attack on a matter of vital national interest to ... the USA.
It is well known that President Bush is loosing patience with the UN on Iraq as well as on anything else. He is now saying "Saddam Hussein is a person who makes the United Nations looks foolish". All this because France, Russia and now Mexico oppose a strong resolution that would, at the same time, define the conditions in which the UN weapons inspectors should work in Iraq, and allow the US forces to invade Iraq if the US -and the US alone or with it British bootlickers- decides that Iraq creates any difficulties. France and Russia suggest a strong resolution on arm inspections, and if this does not work the Security Council, in a second step, would decide what to do, probably allow a multinational force to invade Iraq. This does not please the Americans who want to do it alone and grab the Iraqi oil fields for themselves.
On September 16, 2002, Saddam Hussein decided to let the UN weapons inspectors in Iraq without any pre-conditions attached. The UN General Secretary, Kofi Annan, confirmed this good news but the Americans, starting with George Bush, and their boots-licking British friends, were not happy. For them, war is the number one priority. It is obvious that Bush was caught off guard by the Iraqi decision to let the weapon inspectors in without condition. And he does not come out of it looking well. In Britain, Mr Blair too is sceptical, but he sees the willingness of president Bush to go through the UN option and the U-turn of Saddam Hussein on the arm inspectors, as his own victory. Britain will have a difficult task if it insists in getting a new tough resolution through the UN Security Council now that Iraq has agreed to let the inspectors in. France, Russia and China do not see the need for such a resolution. The UN chief weapon inspector, Mr Hans Blix from Sweden, immediately opened negotiations with the Iraqis to clarify the inspection procedures. They agree to meet again in Vienna at the beginning of October although the Americans tried to stop the process.
At the end of October 2002 it was clear that there would be no agreement between the five permanent members with veto power on the resolution in the form presented to the UN Security Council. At the same time, the conditions for the return of the weapon inspectors have been agreed in Vienna between the UN -Mr Hans Blix- and the representatives of the Iraqi government, but Washington, that wants a war is not convinced, of course, and London follows dutifully in the usual "me too" stance. Now Great Britain behaves like it was the 51t American state with Tony Blair as its governor. After a talk with Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, Mr Blix said that he would wait until the UN Security Council has decided on a new resolution before sending his inspectors to Iraq. He justified his decision by saying that he would be "awkward" for his team to go to Iraq before the Security Council has agreed on its terms of reference. Most probably he changed his mind at the US request!
France holds the key to a compromise on a new resolution on Iraq. President Chirac wants two resolutions before any military intervention, and this is a compromise between the hard positions of the US and Britain on one hand, and the more sceptical Russia and China.
Finally, even President Bush, understood that he could not totally ignore his allies. He presented a new project of resolution to the Security Council that spell in details what is expected from the UN weapons inspectors, but it does not explicitly authorise an invasion if Saddam Hussein does not do what he is told. If the Iraqis prevent the inspectors' work, the USA must come back to the Security Council with another project of resolution. This will be seen as a total success of the French diplomacy, and France will win friends in the east, and some respect in the US. However, the US repeated that if the UN is not able to obtain what is required, America considers itself free to invade Iraq without any new authorisation. ("La raison du plus fort est toujours la meilleure ..., Jean de la Fontaine, 1621/1695). And, of course, their "lecha piedi", the British, agreed and are ready to attack Iraq together with the US without a UN mandate, if the Security Council fails to agree on a common course of action.
At the end of October 2002, only six words are preventing a unanimous agreement on a new resolution on Iraq at the UN Security Council. The US proposal reads like this: "failure by Iraq to comply with, and cooperate fully with the implementation of this resolution (...) shall constitute a material breach of its international obligations". France asks that the following words be added in replacement of the above brackets: "when established by the Security Council". France, but also Russia and China, wants the UN to authorise an invasion, while the USA wants to decide alone. Bush has the support of 55% of the Americans, down from 62% at the end of September, and 64% in August. Ireland and Mauritius are now ready to support the US on their resolution but although the USA has now a majority behind their resolution, three permanent members -France, China and Russia- still threaten to veto it. The US said that they would present a revised project of resolution next week, hoping that it will be acceptable to all UN Security members.
The USA presented a new project of resolution to the UN Security Council on November 6, 2002. President Bush hopes that this time it will be quickly adopted by all permanent members, and by a large majority of the whole Council. This document is taking into consideration some of the French and Russian objections on the previous texts, but not all of them. A vote is foreseen on Friday November 8, but it is not certain if France and Russia will agree wit it.
On November 8, 2002, a strong resolution (No1441) was agreed unanimously by the UN Security Council telling Iraq to let the UN weapon inspectors in their country without limitations or conditions. France and Russia succeeded to have the initial text presented by the US and Britain changed; the former text allowed these two countries to invade Iraq, if they decided that Saddam Hussein was not fully complying. Now, if it is the case, the problem will come back to the Security Council that will decide what to do. As a result, Saddam Hussein has only two choices. He refuses to let the inspectors in Iraq or he creates difficulties, and he will be invaded; he complies, and everybody, except the Americans, will be happy that a war was avoided.
The Russian foreign minister praised the UN resolution on disarming Iraq because, in his view, it averted the threat of war and paved the way for lifting sanctions. Russia, France and China issued a joint resolution saying that the resolution, as adopted, does not automatically sanction the use of force.
The Arab League approved the UN resolution to send weapons inspectors to Iraq, and they urged Saddam Hussein to accept it without condition. However, they want some Arab experts on the inspection team. They also insisted that Syria was right in voting for the inspections, as the resolution does not authorise the US to start a war. The Arab Foreign Ministers, at the end of a meeting of the 22-member Arab League, said that they believe that Iraq will comply with the latest UN resolution, but Saddam Hussein has not formally say so.
On November 12, 2002, the Iraqi parliament voted to reject the latest UN resolution authorising the UN to send its weapons inspectors to Iraq, but it left the final decision to Saddam Hussein who is expected to agree to avoid invasion. And in fact Saddam Hussein agreed to let the inspectors in on Wednesday November 13, 2002, two days before the deadline imposed in the resolution of the UN Security Council.
Bush went to St Petersburg, Russia, on November 22, 2002, to thank president Putin for voting with the USA on the resolution 1441 authorising the UN to send weapons inspectors to Iraq. The talks went on well, and Putin confirmed his agreement to support the fight against terrorism. On Iraq, he confirmed his support for the inspections, but added that the USA should not invade Iraq alone, that a preliminary authorisation of the Security Council of the United Nations was absolutely necessary. This did not please Bush at all.
On November 26, 2002, the British Parliament declared its support for the
UN resolution 1441 on Iraq (what else could they do?) and an amendment requiring
parliamentary approval for any deployment of troop in Iraq, and requiring
a new Security Council mandate before any invasion, was defeated.