Most asked questions about UN and Iraq war

NEW YORK - The following are frequently asked questions about a United Nations report released yesterday and its implications for war in Iraq:

What happens this week?

The two chief weapons inspectors, Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei, briefed the UN Security Council, 60 days after the current round of inspections began.

President George W. Bush will speak on Iraq in his State of the Union address today, a day before the Security Council discusses the report.

Bush meets British Prime Minister Tony Blair, his closest ally, at Camp David on Saturday to discuss strategy. The inspectors are expected to brief the council again on February 14.

What did the inspectors say?

Blix, the executive chairman of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, known as UNMOVIC, criticised Iraq's disclosure of past arms programmes but did not corroborate US claims that Baghdad had rebuilt its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction.

"It is not enough to open doors. Inspection is not a game of 'catch as catch can'," Blix said. He spoke of difficulties in accounting for Iraq's chemical and biological weapons stock.

He said private interviews with scientists were hampered and Iraq was putting conditions on U-2 surveillance plans. ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, was less critical. He said he needed more time to investigate and had not found evidence that Iraq had reconstituted its nuclear arms programme.

Would the UN Security Council back a war?

Not right now, according to France, Russia, China, Germany and other nations in the 15-member body. Most say inspections should be allowed to continue for weeks, if not months. Some nations fear that a US invasion schedule is being tied to when weather in Iraq is best for the US military. A minimum of nine votes and no veto from permanent members - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - are necessary for a resolution. So far the nine votes are lacking, diplomats say.

Is a resolution backing force required?

No. France and others lost that argument in arduous negotiations over resolution 1441, adopted by the Security Council on November 8, although many nations still prefer a direct authorisation by the council and Britain has drafted a resolution.

The heart of the November 8 resolution speaks of a "further material breach" of past UN demands, legal language that voids the 1991 Gulf War ceasefire and can justify a new war.

The resolution says the Security Council has to "assess" a material breach, which would include "false statements and omissions" in Iraq's arms declarations as well as a failure by Iraq to comply with and co-operate in implementing the resolution. The US alone has already declared a "further material breach" but most council members are reluctant to cut short inspections.

What is the US position?

US officials continue to make the case for starting a military campaign soon, arguing that Iraq has already violated the resolution, failed to co-operate actively with inspectors and left out key data in its December 7 12,000-page arms declaration. But the Bush Administration may try to soothe tensions in the Security Council by delaying for a few weeks any decision to attack.

What are the positions of other Security Council members?

French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder have said that war should be avoided. "Any decision belongs to the Security Council and the Security Council alone, which will address the issue after having examined the latest inspectors' report," Chirac said. Permanent council members Russia and China have sided with France. Germany is a non-permanent member and just began a two-year term. Britain has supported US war plans but also wants inspectors to have more time.

What does the public think?

Polls show most people in the US prefer non-military options to unseat Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

US officials, however, expect that Americans will rally around the President should he decide to go to war, depending on how long a conflict lasts.

Outside the US, public opinion, especially in European nations, is strongly against war. Critics say the US has failed to come forward with proof that Iraq still has weapons of mass destruction.

- REUTERS

Herald feature: Iraq

January 28, 2003: