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: Elsewhere who wrote (42130)	9/5/2002 12:30:15 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 281500

Germany rebuffs call to back U.S. TONY CZUCZKA Associated Press Writer BERLIN - Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder rebuffed calls by Britain for Europe to help the United States against Iraq, saying Wednesday that Germany won't tone down its opposition to military action and won't "submit" to Washington. In blunt comments, Schroeder said Tony Blair does not speak for all Europe, a day after the British prime minister declared Iraq "a real and unique threat" to world security and said the United States "should not have to face this issue alone." The exchange highlighted international opposition to the prospect of a U.S. attack on Iraq - despite Blair's attempts to rally support for Washington. At the World Summit in Johannesburg, top European Union leaders met with Secretary of State Colin Powell on Wednesday to lobby against any unilateral U.S. action to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, saying Washington should work through the United Nations for a return of weapons inspectors. Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Powell has assured him that Washington puts "the strongest importance" on international involvement in the Iraq case. Schroeder defended his outspoken opposition to an attack on Iraq, which he has said could hurt the war on terrorism and cause chaos in the Middle East. "Friendship cannot mean that you do what the friend wants even if you have another opinion," he told a news conference in Berlin. "Anything else would not be friendship, but submission - and I would consider that wrong." "With all respect for Tony Blair: Just like anyone else, he will not speak for Europe alone on this issue or on others," he said. "We have absolutely no reason to change our well-founded position. Under my leadership, Germany will not take part in an intervention in Iraq." Schroeder also confirmed that Germany would withdraw six armored personnel carriers equipped to detect nuclear, chemical and biological warfare from Kuwait if the United States launches an attack on Iraq. The vehicles were deployed as part of the U.S.-led war on terrorism. In Washington, President Bush was to meet with leaders from Congress on Wednesday and administration officials said he would promise to seek congressional approval once he decided how to deal with Saddam. Bush says ousting Saddam is a priority but that he hasn't decided what action to take. Vice President Dick Cheney and others in the administration have called for a pre-emptive attack on Iraq, which is accused of seeking to develop weapons of mass destruction. Blair has said his government plans to publish a dossier on Saddam's weapons programs, and a British Foreign Office official said Wednesday he believed the report would be "very convincing." "As far as nuclear weapons are concerned we believe that (Saddam) is in the process of developing that capacity," Mike O'Brien, a junior minister in the Foreign Office, told British Broadcasting Corp. radio. Referring to ballistic missile technology, O'Brien said, "We believe he's in the process of trying to get that, so we'll set out all the details and the evidence in the dossier." He did not say if the report would have any previously unpublished information. In Cairo, Arab foreign ministers opened a meeting on Wednesday at which the U.S. threats on Iraq were high on the agenda. Baghdad has been seeking Arab support, but some Arab governments have been pressing for Iraq to accept U.N. weapons inspectors. In his talks with Powell in South Africa, Denmark's Fogh Rasmussen said that while there is "no doubt" Saddam is dangerous, Washington should not try to deal with the Iraqi leader alone. "It is vitally important to pursue the U.N. track," said Fogh Rasmussen, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency. Powell has said the United States should first try to force a return of U.N. weapons inspectors to Iraq before deciding the next step, though Cheney has said making inspections a priority would be counterproductive. Heading to Johannesburg, Powell acknowledged there were differences in the administration, adding, "Some are real, some are perceived, some are overhyped." He said it was "premature" to say what "will or should happen" if Saddam continues to refuse the U.N. Security Council's demands.

To: Elsewhere who wrote (42130)	9/5/2002 1:15:51 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

NATO won't take part Schroeder is playing the Politics as the German Election gets close. I laughed when the Dems played the "NATO" support card at the start of our involvement in the Balkans. It will be a cold day in hell before we do something like that again. I have been questioning our "troops stationed in Germany" position again. It is really hard to justify the expense of keeping them there, now that we are down to ten Divisions.

To: Elsewhere who wrote (42130)	9/5/2002 4:26:33 PM
From: Elsewhere	Respond to of 281500

The English version: "Pre-Emptive Strike on Iraq? Count NATO Out" Thu Sep 5, 3:50 PM ET By John Chalmers story.news.yahoo.com BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) - Count NATO out if there is a preemptive strike on Iraq. Officials say that even if the United States wanted to involve NATO -- which is unlikely -- it would have its work cut out making a case for offensive action by an alliance whose defining principle is self-defense. NATO invoked its Article V mutual defense clause for the first time the day after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, but it was sidelined from the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan that followed. An official at the 19-nation alliance, asked if Article V could be re-invoked for strikes on Iraq, replied "There is no chance. ... We're talking preemptive action here and that's not part of NATO's doctrine." Article V of the Washington Treaty under which NATO was established in 1949 states that an armed attack against one ally or more in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack on all, legitimizing defensive action. Diplomats said this left room for interpretation of what constitutes an attack, and if the United States did want to draw NATO into action against Iraq it could try to make a case. "It's a legal and political question," said one western European diplomat at NATO's headquarters. "How do you define an attack? Hostile intent? A shot fired? Where does clear and present danger start? If you could prove that Saddam was going to press the button on a biological weapon in the next 20 seconds, maybe you could justify action." NATO Secretary-General George Robertson made it clear at a meeting of defense ministers in June that the alliance would keep deterrence as its first option. "We do not go out looking for problems to solve," he said. AMBIGUOUS POLICY However, the Center for European Security and Disarmament said in a recent newsletter that NATO's "Strategic Concept," which was last updated in 1999, did not preclude preemptive action even if it did not specifically authorize it. It noted that Robertson, pressed at a news conference to say whether NATO could take preemptive action, replied: "Waiting for an attack to take place might not be the best choice." "The alliance is keeping its policy ambiguous to maximize its flexibility of response," the center said. Diplomats say there is now a debate about whether to include preemptive action in the new version of NATO's "Military Concept" being drawn up for a summit in Prague in November. The military concept is essentially a guide for NATO leaders giving a range of options for a range of possible threats. Tim Garden of the Center for Defense Studies at King's College London said he expected the United States to push at the Prague summit for NATO to move toward preemption as an option. "But I don't think it will get very far because European governments do not want to give America a blank check to carry out the kind of wars it wants," he said. The center said that a recent NATO crisis management exercise -- in which a Middle Eastern country was ready to attack Turkey with biological and chemical weapons -- had underlined most allies' reluctance to be drawn into preemptive action. "Facing the reluctance of the other allies to agree, ... the U.S. and Turkey declared themselves ready for such action, with or without the participation of others," it said. Garden said several European allies, notably Germany, were firmly opposed to military action against Iraq. In any case, the United States would not want to have its hands tied in Iraq by NATO allies. "The United States would not wish to conduct a politically difficult operation in Iraq with all the constraints that NATO would bring," he said. "The Americans felt they had problems getting clearance from other members in Kosovo: they will want to do Iraq their way, just as they did in Afghanistan.