Nick Arnett wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Behalf Of Robert J. Chassell
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 9:01 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: US out of UN?
> >
> >
> > On 8 November 2002, states in the United Nations with veto power,
> > that is, with rights as individual states to prevent super-state
> > action, agreed
> >
> > ... that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
> > obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687
> > (1991), ...
> >
> > [U.N. Chapter VII Resolution 1441]
> >
> > and also agreed to remind the Government of Iraq
> >
> > ... that the [UN Security] Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that
> > it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued
> > violations of its obligations ....
> >
> > [U.N. Chapter VII Resolution 1441]
> >
> > However, it appears as I write this that the major states are not
> > going to agree to follow-up action -- they will not agree to the
> > `serious consequences' of the resolution.
>
> Did the resolution set a deadline? Is it possible that the disagreement is
> over *when* the serious consequences are due?
Quoting from part of the resolution (and sorry about the formatting, but I
can either fix it or post tonight, and I'm posting tonight!):
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in
particular
through Iraq�s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and
the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of
resolution 687 (1991);
2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by
this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament
obligations
under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to
set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and
verified
completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687
(1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament
obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual declarations,
the Government
of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the Council, not later
than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently accurate, full,
and
complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop
chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other
delivery
systems such as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems
designed for use on aircraft, including any holdings and precise locations
of such
weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related
material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development
and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological,
and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not
related to
weapon production or material;
The resolution requires a full declaration within 30 days. It's been a lot
longer than that, and at the *very* least, there was buried in Blix's report
something about an unmanned plane, wingspan 7.45 meters (for some reason,
that detail just stuck with me), that was *not* in the declaration produced
by Iraq, and on that detail alone, you could argue that the deadline for
full disclosure was not met. (There are probably other things, as well; I
just remember the plane.)
Full text of the resolution at
http://www.state.gov/p/nea/rls/15016.htm
Does this help answer your question? (I hope so. It's all I can really do
before I head for bed....)
Julia
a little grumpy herself, actually
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
