Part 3:
There was a UNSC mandate for Iraq to FULLY ACCOUNT for its WMD/missile programs and inventories. There was a requirement to never recommence either again. Failing to comply with either conditions would violate the principle of restoring international peace and international stability, as called for in UNSC 678. And with a material breach of those UNSC conditions, the situation would naturally "default" back to the previous existing UNSC resolutions "all necessary means" contained in UNSC 678, which removed any UN prohibition related to using force to enforce its binding resolutions.
When the discrepancy of 6,000 chemical warheads brought "inspections" to a halt in July, 1998, the UNSCOM and UNSC demanded that Iraq provide the document (which the "minder" had confiscated from the inspection team), as well as fully accounting for the disposition of those 6,000 warheads. The disposition of those 6,000 weapons HAS NEVER BEEN ACOUNTED FOR. And "losing" 6,000 weapons is more than just an "oversight".
So when UNSC 1441 was passed, 15-0, by the UNSC and declared Iraq in material breach, Iraq was obligated to resolve those material breaches, including accounting for those 6,000 warheads and was provide 90 days to come into compliance. That's all they had to do.. account for those weapons and FULLY cooperate with the UNMOVIC inspection team (not make them have to "hunt them down")..
So after 90 days passed, there was NO AUTHORIZATION for UNMOVIC to continue existing. If Iraq continued to be in material breach, severe consequences would result, not a perpetual continuation of the "hide and seek" game..
any measure UNSCOM/UNMOVIC was far more successful in finding shit, then the US is.
And herein lies the problem with perspectives such as yours. You "lay down the law" to Saddam to reveal everything, and then provide more than ample "wiggle room" for him to thumb his nose at the UN (not just the US) and turn the inspection process into an utter farce.
UNSCOM/UNMOVIC's responsibilities were NOT to "find things"... That's not an inspection.. It's called an investigation.
Hawk |
