Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KLP who wrote (42009)	9/4/2002 7:32:36 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 281500

Bush Seeks Support at Home and Abroad on Iraq Updated 6:37 PM ET September 4, 2002 By Arshad Mohammed WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said on Wednesday he would ask Congress to back possible military action against Iraq and would outline the "serious threat" posed by Iraq's arms program at the United Nations. Seeking to blunt criticism that he has failed to make a case for any strike against Iraq, Bush said he would lay out his arguments against Baghdad in a Sept. 12 speech at the United Nations and in consultations over the next week with the leaders of Britain, Russia, China, France and Canada. While aides say he has made no decisions about using force, Bush met lawmakers to discuss Iraq and its efforts to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, saying bluntly: "Doing nothing about that serious threat is not an option." He also promised to seek approval -- possibly in the next five weeks -- from Congress for any action. The White House said Bush specifically wanted a congressional resolution to allow for the use of force if he decides that is necessary. There has been growing speculation that Bush plans to take the war on terrorism launched after the Sept. 11 attacks to Iraq, which he fears may use weapons of mass destruction itself or give them to militants who could "blackmail" the world. "I will first remind the United Nations that for 11 long years Saddam Hussein has sidestepped, crawfished, wheedled out of any agreement he made not to develop weapons of mass destruction," Bush told reporters. "And so I'm going to call upon the world to recognize that he is stiffing (defying) the world," by evading commitments he made to disarm after his defeat in the 1991 Gulf War. "Saddam Hussein is a serious threat. He is a significant problem. And it's something that this country must deal with." A senior U.S. official said Bush was weighing a new form of U.N. weapons inspections to replace the existing regime but declined to provide details. Another aide confirmed a report that Washington was considering "coercive inspections" with foreign troops shooting their way into sites if necessary. 'WHATEVER IS NECESSARY' "The issue is not inspectors; the issue is disarmament," Bush said. "This is a man (Saddam) who told the world that he would not harbor weapons of mass destruction ... and I'll be discussing ways to make sure that that is the case." The heated rhetoric on Iraq and the possibility of military action drove oil prices higher. New York Mercantile Exchange Crude oil futures for October delivery ended 48 cents, or 1.7 percent, higher at $28.27 per barrel. They slid $1.19 a barrel on Tuesday amid Iraqi diplomatic overtures to avert an attack. In Baghdad, Saddam said Iraqis did not want a war with the United States but would fight if they had to. "Your brothers in Iraq wish that God would spare them evil and avoid fighting," Saddam told Arab lawmakers gathered in Baghdad to show their opposition to any U.S. strike. "(But) if God chooses that we have to fight, we won't disappoint you." Bush told lawmakers he would "go to the Congress to seek approval" for any action. A senior U.S. official who asked not to be named said Bush believes he already had legal authority to act but wanted a gesture of support from Congress. "At an appropriate time ... I will seek congressional support for U.S. action to do whatever is necessary to deal with the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime," Bush said in a letter given to the 18 lawmakers invited to the White House. "We must not allow an outlaw regime that incites and uses terror at home and abroad to threaten the world by developing the ultimate weapons of terror," Bush said. "The months ahead will be important ones and the civilized world must come together to deal with the threat posed by the Iraqi regime." White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said Bush may seek such a resolution even before he has decided to use force. The White House hopes it will get a vote in the month or so before Congress adjourns ahead of the Nov. 5 congressional elections. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, a South Dakota Democrat, voiced concern that the Iraq debate might tinge the elections, where Bush and his fellow Republicans might benefit from a patriotic boost from any eventual military action. "There are skeptics out there who wonder to what extent the political implications of any of this may affect the elections," Daschle told reporters, saying he believed Bush could make a compelling case and win support. "But so far that case has not been made satisfactorily." CONFUSION ON INSPECTIONS House of Representatives Majority Leader Dick Armey, a Texas Republican who has opposed military action against Iraq, told Bush during the meeting that he was not yet persuaded, congressional sources said. As part of the Bush administration's campaign, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld briefed lawmakers, who said they learned little new. "There is no smoking gun," Utah Republican Sen. Robert Bennett told reporters. "It's an incremental build-up of information." Bush said he would meet British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Saturday at Camp David to discuss Iraq and would also be on the phone to leaders of China, Russia and France. He will see Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien on Monday in Detroit. "I will work with our friends in the world," Bush said. The president is to address the U.N. General Assembly on Sept. 12, a day after solemn ceremonies marking the attacks against the United States. Bush launched his war on terrorism after the attacks by toppling the Taliban regime in Afghanistan which sheltered accused Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden. U.S. allies, Muslim countries and many other nations are wary of any unilateral action, demanding a role for the United Nations in clarifying Iraq's capabilities and intent, and in authorizing any attack should that effort fail. Bush's U.N. speech may lay to rest confusion sowed by his top aides who have sent conflicting signals about whether they believe that U.N. weapons inspectors can be effective.

To: KLP who wrote (42009)	9/4/2002 7:34:33 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 281500

PR war over Iraq escalates Bush promises to make a forceful case to Congress and UN as allies balk at plans to topple Hussein. By Howard LaFranchi \| Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor WASHINGTON – President Bush is preparing to make his case to the court of world opinion for "regime change" in Iraq. But these are not the best of times for the US to be selling the idea of using military force to change the government of another country – even if it is one run by the likes of Saddam Hussein. With much of the world having lost whatever sympathy surged for the US in the wake of 9/11, and with fears rising of the world's sole superpower too often acting alone on foreign issues, Washington's tough talk on Iraq is resurrecting images of a warmongering America. Many foreign leaders, in particular, agreed this week with Nobel Peace Prize winner Nelson Mandela when he said he was "appalled" by America's willingness to act alone against another country. German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder is finding his sagging reelection campaign buoyed by his shift to tough talk of his own – against American war drums. Part of the international hostility stems from what British Prime Minister Tony Blair Tuesday called "straightforward anti-Americanism." For its part, Iraq has set its own PR machine in motion – with some success. As US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld noted this week, the Iraqis are talented at "play[ing] the international community and the UN process like a guitar, plucking the right string at the right moment to delay something." With polls showing a majority of Americans favor military action to remove President Hussein from power – provided the US has the support of allies and partners in the region – the Bush administration's case for toppling him becomes all the more crucial, even when making the case for an international audience has become more complex. For some international observers, any judgment of how the US is doing at selling its case is premature, since Washington has yet to really begin consulting its allies on Iraq. But that is about to change. Saying "the process starts now," Mr. Bush said at the White House Wednesday that he would use his speech to the UN General Assembly Sept. 12 to begin making the case to the world for action against Iraq. Bush spoke as he began a campaign to woo congressional support for tackling Hussein. Tough sell for the US Many, however, say the US will find international misgivings on the issue much harder to overcome today than it was preceding the Gulf War a decade ago – and for reasons that have nothing to do with Iraq's PR talents. "People are worried about more war in the Middle East: They're fearful when they see the US eager to use force against countries it doesn't like, and that's not because the Iraqis are great at playing the guitar," says Stephen Walt, an international relations expert at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government in Cambridge, Mass. "It's because people are convinced war with Iraq is going to cause more trouble than ... it solves." Mr. Walt ticks off a list of reasons the US is in "much worse" standing with the world than in 1990-91 – starting with talk of a policy of preemptive military action. "Then Iraq had engaged in an unprovoked attack on an independent state, but now the situation is almost completely reversed," he says. "It's the US contemplating an attack" on a country that has violated various UN resolutions "but is still more or less behaving itself." Attacking Iraq also risks diverting attention and resources from the war with Al Qaeda, which the world sees as a legitimate fight. With many nations convinced a policy of containing Iraq has worked pretty well, a US attack might raise suspicions of American motives. Still, other observers believe the US can make a convincing case for taking on Hussein – provided it works through the UN Security Council. That view is backed up by some recent polling in Europe. It shows public opposition there to any US military action shifting to support, if it is backed by UN resolutions. "In fact it would be relatively easy [for Washington] to make the case and line up the necessary political support, though maybe not military support, for a strike against the Iraqi regime," says Klaus Becher, a transatlantic expert at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. "But the key is to use the Security Council." Iraq's history of violating UN resolutions sets the stage for Council action, he says. "The argument hasn't hit home in Washington that if you want to use preemptive force, the only way to do it is through the Security Council," he continues. Besides the other convincing arguments that could be made, Mr. Becher adds, Council members would likely go along "because it wouldn't be the challenge to the international order that the US acting unilaterally would be." Olive branch from Europe Along those lines, foreign ministers of the 15-member European Union are advancing a plan for a Security Council resolution: It would allow for Iraq to be attacked if it didn't meet a deadline for allowing in international weapons inspectors. The plan is seen as an attempt by Europe to bridge differences with Washington. In his comments this week, Mr. Blair showed support for Bush, arguing for tough action against Hussein. He said much of the recent debate would leave one "to think that we're dealing with some benign little democracy out in Iraq." But Becher says the problem is that Washington has yet to give world leaders the detailed arguments they need to convince their own publics. "Without that they would be accused of being Washington's poodle," he says, "as Tony Blair has been."