Initiative aimed at Iraq compromise finding favour at UN.
( Your opinion on this March 28 deadline Thomas? )
Canada backs Mar. 28 deadline for Iraq
WASHINGTON (CP) - Canada is circulating a compromise United Nations initiative that would explicitly call on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to disarm by March 28 or face war.
"There is room between the two positions," Prime Minister Jean Chrétien said today.
"But I don't know if it is possible to find a compromise."
The United States, backed by Britain and some other countries, insists Iraq has repeatedly failed to comply with a UN resolution to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and it supports a quick attack on the country.
France, Germany and many others said there's no need to rush to war and Iraq should be given more time to comply.
The Canadian proposals, which are being welcomed by some swing-voting members of the UN Security Council, are seen a possible way to bridge the acrimonious split among world powers over Iraq.
"We're trying to bridge the divide with this proposal because we believe the reputation of the United Nations is at stake," said a senior aide to Chrétien.
"But we want to maintain a tough line against Saddam Hussein because at a particular point, enough is enough."
Canada has suggested specific disarmament benchmarks Iraq must satisfy as part of its recommendations.
U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte seemed to reject the concept Monday, when he told the council the only benchmarks Iraq has to meet were in the November UN resolution.
By setting an end-of-March deadline for Iraqi compliance, the Canadian scenario would give Saddam an extra two weeks beyond the implied date for a possible invasion in a game plan outlined by the U.S. administration.
A March 28th time limit could trigger an invasion three months before the program envisioned by France, Germany, Russia and other countries.
"We view the Canadian proposal favourably and are working on this," said a Chilean diplomat at that country's mission to the United Nations, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"We think it is better than the French position which allows this situation to continue indefinitely."
Chile is one of 10 temporary members of the Security Council and will vote on any resolution on Iraq. Chrétien has discussed the Canadian "middle way" proposal with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos by telephone. He expects similar backing from Mexico after arriving in that country Wednesday for talks with Mexican President Vicente Fox.
Representatives from Pakistan and Cameroon were also interested enough in the Canadian ideas to take them back to their respective capitals for discussion.
Canada is not on the Security Council and does not have a vote on any resolution to topple Saddam. Several Canadian diplomats went to pains Tuesday not to portray their initiative as much more than an attempt at international compromise.
Canadian UN Ambassador Paul Heinbecker is leading an intensive effort at hallway diplomacy to help the six undecided Security Council members before a vote that will determine Saddam's fate. Chile, Mexico, Pakistan and Cameroon are among the all-important undecided half-dozen countries.
Those countries see the Canadian proposal as a possible compromise between the bitterly conflicting positions of the United States and Britain and the more dovish French and Russian delegations.
"We intend to speak in favour of the Canadian proposition Thursday," the Chilean diplomat said.
A closed-door Security Council session on an Iraqi resolution will be held Thursday. A vote on that resolution is expected to take place March 7, or soon afterward.
The stakes could hardly be higher. The resolution's defeat would leave the United States with no option but to go it alone, inflicting great damage on UN authority
The proposal by the French, Germans and Russians demands at least four more months of weapons inspections in Iraq and baldly states military force is not yet justified.
"The military option should only be a last resort," the document, referred to as a memorandum, said. It said conditions for resorting to force have not been met.
The proposal backed by the United States, Britain and Spain is effectively a war resolution. It declares Iraq has "failed to take the final opportunity" offered by November's Resolution 1441 demanding Baghdad disarm.
Legal trigger language, such as "material breach," has been relegated to the preamble in an effort to broaden its appeal.
President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair dismissed any notion of extending UN inspections in Iraq.
It would be "absurd" to give Saddam more time to disarm, unless he offers complete co-operation. Bush urged the United Nations to "honour its word" and support tough action against Iraq.
thestar.com. |
