Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

DATE=11-12-02

TYPE=U-S OPINION ROUNDUP

TITLE=U-N IRAQ VOTE

NUMBER=6-12710

BYLINE=ANDREW GUTHRIE

DATELINE=WASHINGTON

EDITOR=ASSIGNMENTS

TELEPHONE=619-3335

CONTENT=

INTRO: There is considerable reaction in the American press to the unexpected unanimous Security Council disarmament ultimatum to Iraq. It demands acceptance of inspectors to ascertain the extent of the Iraqi arsenal; the first step to decommissioning it, and it is seen as a major victory for President Bush. We get a sampling now from _____________ in today's U-S Opinion Roundup.

TEXT: The unanimous vote was a surprise, given the early opposition to language both France and Russia felt would open the door for rapid U-S military action if Iraq did not comply. However changes in the wording finally satisfied Paris and Moscow that the resolution was appropriate. Most U-S papers are pleased with the outcome, although there is still some apprehension. The New York Times suggests the unanimous vote:

VOICE: . sends the strongest possible message to Baghdad. Saddam Hussein . must honor fully and without further delay his long-evaded disarmament obligations. U-N inspectors will soon be returning, reinforced by tough new ground rules and tight new deadlines. The council's unified stand maximizes the possibility, admittedly slim, that Iraq can be disarmed without war. . This is a well-deserved triumph for President Bush, a tribute to eight weeks of patient but determined and coercive American diplomacy.

. we hope the Bush administration has not invested the effort in winning unanimous support for this resolution only to end up acting unilaterally against Iraq. If Baghdad violates any of these provisions, Washington should insist that the Security Council enforce its decision. Only if the council fails to approve the serious consequences it now invokes - - generally understood to be military measures - - should Washington consider acting alone.

TEXT: Reaction from The New York Times. In the nation's capital, The Washington Post calls it "A Firm Resolution" and adds:

VOICE: . it aligns the world behind the Bush administration's campaign and should help ensure that any U-S military action wins broad international support. Getting the Security Council vote required eight weeks of excruciating negotiations - - ably executed by Secretary of State Colin . Powell - - and also a series of American concessions. In substantive terms, Mr. Bush was forced to agree to discuss any violations by Iraq with the Security Council, rather than moving automatically to military action.

. there is . almost no chance that Saddam Hussein will comply with the Security Council's resolution. The dictator tenaciously endured seven years of U-N inspections in the 1990s without ever accepting the principle, much less the practice, of disarmament, and it may be that he would rather die fighting than do so now. Most likely he will try to play the system, appearing to cooperate long enough to survive the coming winter, the most propitious time for a U-S-led invasion. .

TEXT: Iraq's parliament has refused to agree to the U-N resolution, but left the final decision to Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. The parliament's action draws this rebuke from Charleston's [S-C] Post and Courier.

VOICE: The call by leaders of the Iraqi parliament to reject the . Security Council's tough new mandate to render harmless Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction reeks of bad faith. Once again the Iraqi dictator is playing games with the United Nations. This time, however, he will not be able to get away with his old tricks. . Judging by Saddam's past tactics, the Iraqi leader is merely playing for time. So parliament can be expected to put on a charade to delay the return of U-N weapons inspectors. This time the Security Council cannot allow itself to be deceived.

TEXT: Back now to the U-N vote, given this assessment from Kentucky's Louisville Courier-Journal.

VOICE: Secretary of State Colin Powell wrote earlier this week . that the United Nations "has given Saddam Hussein and his regime one last chance. It is now for Baghdad to seize it." . the Iraqi dictator would do well to digest the Secretary of State's advice carefully. In any case . the U-N resolution adopted last Friday was a remarkable triumph for U-S diplomacy.

TEXT: Florida's Orlando Sentinel observes: "President Bush deserves a lot of credit for the tough U-N resolution on Iraq." However, a skeptical voice can still be heard from Boston's Christian Science Monitor, which points out:

VOICE: President Bush failed over the summer to provide enough hard evidence of Iraqi support to al-Qaida to justify a war against Saddam Hussein. But rather than retreat in the face of international doubts, Mr. Bush instead launched a new moral offensive. Last Friday . he won a 15-to nothing vote in the Security Council for a U-N resolution that could simply catch Iraq in a lie about weapons of mass destruction.

.But the problem of persuasive evidence remains. How believable is U-S intelligence in countering an Iraqi claim that it's innocent? For the rest of the Security Council, the threshold may be high. For a U-S administration that seems trigger happy after the tragedy of September eleventh, just one C-I-A report of Iraqi deception may be enough to justify firing away.

TEXT: Opposition from Boston's Christian Science Monitor.

Colorado's Rocky Mountain News in Denver decries the proliferation of casualty estimate for any war with Iraq, citing the total unpredictability of any battle. And Wisconsin's Milwaukee Journal urges the 22-member Arab League to follow up with private conversations, its public declaration for Saddam Hussein to agreed to the Security Council resolution.

Turning to The Sun in Baltimore, its view is that the time for procrastinating is over.

VOICE: It's expected that, in a week's time, international weapons inspectors will return to Baghdad after a four-year hiatus. They will arrive with a strong, unequivocal mandate from the United Nations that leaves Saddam Hussein with few options - - disarm voluntarily or else. . But if Mr. Hussein decides to play it as he has in the past - - 12 years of lies, deceit and obfuscation - - then Mr. Bush will be in the enviable position of being able to tell the world, "I told you so."

He will have satisfied U-S allies' desire to proceed initially on a diplomatic track. He will have helped deliver a strong mandate for the inspectors, who felt they needed the clout to deal effectively with the Iraqi regime. And he will have acted as a responsible international citizen. Then Mr. Bush will be in position to exercise his war powers with or without the rest of the world.

TEXT: With that comment from the Sun in Baltimore [Maryland] we conclude this editorial sampling on last week's U-N Security Council vote compelling Iraq to accept weapons inspectors.

NEB/ANG/FC