|
UN
Arms Experts May Return To Iraq Under Set Terms: Ramadan
 |
| Taha
Yassin Ramadan |
DUBAI,
March 18 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Iraq may allow UN arms
inspectors back into the country if the United Nations draws up a
list of sites and a timetable for inspections, Vice-President Taha
Yassin Ramadan said in comments published Monday.
"Iraq
refuses the return of inspectors for as long as the sites for
inspection and a precise timetable are not drawn up," he told
the London based Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper.
Baghad's
refusal to submit to arms inspections, since weapons monitors fled
the country ahead of punitive air strikes on Iraq in December 1998,
has led Washington to threaten further military action to overthrow
President Saddam Hussein, Agence France-Presse (AFP) reported.
Ramadan
branded the inspectors "spies" whose return "is
designed to bring to light information on Iraq so that the next
American strike is more painful than previous ones.
Iraq
"is totally free from weapons of mass destruction,"
Ramadan said, suggesting an Arab inspection team could visit any
site, including presidential palaces.
Ramadan
told the Saudi-owned Arabic daily the Middle East mission by U.S.
envoy Anthony Zinni "is intended to calm the situation on the
Palestinian front so the United States can carry out their plans for
Iraq."
"The
continuation of the Palestinian intifada (uprising) has delayed an
American strike against Iraq," he said.
The
Iraqi vice president criticized the Middle East tour of his American
counterpart Dick Cheney, alleging the U.S. vice president was
"trying to win support for a strike, the overthrow of the Iraqi
regime and the failure of the Arab summit," in Beirut on March
27-28.
Ramadan
reiterated Iraq's offer to receive a Kuwaiti delegation to settle
the issue of people missing or taken prisoner during the 1991 Gulf
War and still unaccounted for.
Asked
if a dialogue could be started between Iraq and the United States,
he said Baghdad "can talk to every country in the world, except
Israel."
"But
we will not run after the United States, we do not trust them
because they are a traditional enemy for us."
He
condemned the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act passed during Bill Clinton's
presidency, which provides backing for Iraqi opposition movements,
and said Washington "considers Iraq as one of the American
states."
Ramadan
denied that Afghan opposition figure Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, who heads
the Hezb-i-Islami (Islamic Party), had been given refuge in Iraq
after leaving Iran.
"He
is not in our country and we will never agree to have him."
In
another development, the Russian news online PRAVDA said that as the
rhetoric increases from the U.S. administration, orders for military
aircraft fuel increase.
Despite
the claims by British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the U.S.
Vice-President Richard Cheney that there are no plans under way for
an assault on Iraq, the signs are that such is being planned behind
the scenes.
U.S.
National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice declared recently that the
Iraqi regime poses not only a threat to its neighbours and to its
people, but also to peace and stability in the world. These, after
the “axis of evil” speech by President Bush, are strong words,
particularly in the context of current world politics, in which
substantiated suspicion is deemed to be a free pass for military
action.
The orders for aircraft fuel by the US authorities in March/April
have increased considerably, pointing towards a storage process in
preparation for a strike. While 150,000 barrels each are to be
delivered to the bases at Jacobabad in Pakistan and Bagram and
Kandahar in Afghanistan, for the operations currently taking place,
1.2 million barrels are ordered for the base in the United Arab
Emirates, Star Jebel.
Confirming the Iraqi vice president's words, the PRAVDA said that
the journey undertaken by Richard Cheney around the Middle East,
ostensibly to discuss the question of Palestine, is said to be an
attempt by Washington to prepare a coalition for attack similar to
the one, which saw 32 armies fight against the Iraqi administration
in the Gulf War in 1991.
However, such an idea, if posed, is likely to fall on deaf ears this
time. On meeting Mr. Cheney, King Abdullah II of Jordan declared
that he rejects “any use of force against Iraq”, while public
opinion in Saudi Arabia is strongly against any military action
against its northern neighbor and other Arab nations consider the
Palestinian question to be of more immediate importance.
Antoine Basbous, director of the Observatory of Arab Countries in
France, declared in an interview quoted by AFP, “Cheney is
preparing the attack against Iraq, while Zinni tries to defuse the
crisis in the Middle East”.
The notion that the U.S. administration has decided to topple the
Ba’ath regime of Saddam Hussein sends political ripples through
the world of international diplomacy. Russian Foreign Minister Igor
Ivanov reiterated Moscow’s hostility to such an attack on Tuesday,
claiming that “Russia strongly favors a political solution to the
Iraqi situation, based on the U.N. Security Council resolutions and
in agreement with international law”.
The European Union is preparing to send an envoy to Baghdad to
convince Saddam Hussein to allow the weapons inspectors back into
Iraq; an action which would take away any grounds for a military
strike. The British Ambassador at the U.N., Sir Jeremy Greenstock,
questions “whether Iraq poses such a serious threat and whether
there are no alternatives to military action, something which has
not yet been considered”.
Iran, meanwhile, threatens that if the U.S. attacks Iraq, “they
will be drawn into a swamp, which will be worse than Vietnam”, as
Ayatollah Ali Mechkini, President of the Assembly of Wise Men,
stated.
In
an exclusive interview with IslamOnline, the Egyptian military
analyst Mohammed Abdel Salam, said that he doesn't believe that the
U.S. will attack Iraq in the near future.
He
said that the U.S. administration did not take the decision of
attacking Iraq but it took the decision of toppling the Iraqi regime
and there is a big difference between the two options.
Abdel
Salam added that the most likely scenario for striking Iraq, which
is carrying out a ground invasion with an estimated U.S. military
force of 50-150 thousand soldiers, in addition to cooperation with
the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution, the Kurds and Sunni
elements within Iraq. This scenario, however, is problematic.
First,
within the U.S. military itself, there are different opinions
concerning how many troops will be needed. The suggestions rang
between 150 thousand to 250 thousand soldiers.
Second,
the Kurds are wary of cooperating with the U.S. fearing that the
Iraqi regime will not be toppled.
Third,
the neighboring countries that do not oppose toppling the Iraqi
regime fear the U.S. would fail in toppling the regime.
Fourth,
Turkey, one of many neighboring countries that would not support the
Kurds with military aid, fears the Kurds would fight for separate
state.
Fifth,
there is no clear evidence that the Sunni elements support toppling
the Iraqi regime.
Finally,
there is no historical precedent in the Arab world of toppling any
regime using military force.
Asked
about the Arab stance in the case of a U.S. attack on Iraq, Abdel
Salam said that Arab world will denounce the attack but will not
take any move to stop it.
|
