Clinton urges postwar diplomacy
U.S. punishing nations not fighting in Iraq would be 'gross overreaction'
By JANET McFARLAND
Wednesday, April 16, 2003
NEW YORK -- Former U.S. president Bill Clinton said yesterday it would be a "gross overreaction" for Washington to punish those that didn't join the war in Iraq and should push to involve as many countries as possible in the reconstruction of the shattered country.
Speaking to a business audience at a conference on corporate accountability in New York, Mr. Clinton said that, in many cases, the disagreement over Iraq at the United Nations came down to a question of timing because many countries wanted to give weapons inspectors more time to do their work.
"I think the idea that we should scorn everyone who disagreed with us when all these countries came to our aid after 9/11 and still have soldiers at risk in Afghanistan today would be a gross overreaction," Mr. Clinton said.
Canada has soldiers in Afghanistan and did not support the war in Iraq, but the only countries Mr. Clinton mentioned by name in his remarks were France and Germany, which have taken the greatest criticism within the United States for their lack of support.
"It's a complicated world out there. They don't all work for us," Mr. Clinton said.
He added that he is pleased that the United States has defeated Saddam Hussein -- "and good riddance to him" -- but said the country should now try to bring the world back together again after the deep divide caused by the Iraqi war.
"I think to look around and try to get even with the rest of the world would be an error. We have to bring the world together," he said. "If you can't jail all your adversaries, sooner or later you have to make a deal."
He said both the reconstruction of Iraq and a resolution to the lingering nuclear threat in North Korea present opportunities to strengthen the international community and restore international faith in the U.S. administration.
Mr. Clinton also suggested yesterday that President George W. Bush's leadership team may have made poor decisions about the Iraqi conflict because individuals were under stress, although he did not name specific members.
"Sometimes when people are under stress, they hate to think, and it's the time when they most need to think," he said.
He said chief weapons inspector Hans Blix "was begging for more time," and other countries wanted him to have it, yet the Bush administration would not bend.
"We determined, 'We are going to do it now, and if you don't like it, we'll get even with you when it's over,' " Mr. Clinton said.
Mr. Clinton said that with more time, there is a chance Iraq would have disarmed, or that more countries would have supported the U.S. campaign.
Nonetheless, he said he does not blame Mr. Bush for feeling he needed to act to neutralize Iraq's potential chemical or biological weapons. Although there is still no clear evidence that such weapons existed in Iraq, Mr. Clinton said many intelligence reports while he was president clearly argued the country had an active chemical weapons program.
He said Mr. Bush could not ignore those allegations.
"It's irresponsible for a president to say 'I've just got a hunch they're all wrong,' " he said.
He added that the U.S. government should restore a Democratic proposal defeated last year to allocate money to pay countries around the world to destroy stocks of chemical weapons or improve the security of their storage. He said it's a logical program to support if the United States is prepared to go to war over the existence of chemical weapons in Iraq.
globeandmail.ca |
