Islam Online- News Section

عربي

Home

News

Shari`ah

Counseling:

Search »

Advanced Search »

10 Blessed Days New

Mumbai Attacks & Aftermath New

Hajj 1429 New
Ibrahim's Call

Gaza: Open-Air Prison **

I Witness Hajj & Adha

World in Pictures

Venice Submerged

Islam, Muslims & Violence

Overcoming Masturbation

America in Transition **

World Economic
Crisis **

Iraq in Focus **

Radio Broadcast

» Special Pages

Services

Egypt, Kuwait, Iran, Jordan May Accept "Justified" War on Iraq: Straw

Straw says officials of the government of Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Iran, have “fear, loathing and contempt for Saddam Hussein”

LONDON, October 12 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Saturday October 12, that Egypt, Jordan, Iran and Kuwait may find military action against Iraq "justifiable" if authorized by international law and seen as a last resort.

"None of the foreign ministers and heads of government of Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Iran, has anything but fear, loathing and contempt for Saddam Hussein and the deepest possible concern about the continuing and growing threat of Iraq," the Agence France-Press (AFP) quoted Straw as telling BBC radio.

"None of us wants a war. But all of these countries recognize that provided military action is authorized by international law and was a last resort, it could be justifiable."

Straw was speaking after a four day tour of Middle East and Gulf countries in which he had tried to convince their leaders of the seriousness of U.S. threats of military intervention in Iraq, supported by Britain.

Straw said he was working around the clock with Britain's partners on the United Nations Security Council (France, Russia, China and the United States) on "trying to get together a satisfactory resolution or resolutions to deal with the matter, and the whole focus is on the disarmament of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."

A U.S.-British draft resolution would give Baghdad seven days to declare all its alleged weapons of mass destruction programs or face military action, and another 23 days to cooperate fully with U.N. inspection teams.

But France and Russia support the idea of a two-stage ultimatum: one resolution that would demand more effective inspections, and another later if necessary to green-light the use of military force.

"The starting point for all of the P5 (permanent five members of the Security Council) and that includes without any doubt the U.S. administration, is that every single one wants this resolved peacefully," Straw added. "None of them wants military action.

"If we do get to a new resolution which is satisfactory, requires the readmission of the weapons inspectors without any condition, and that then happens, there could be no military action, because there could be no justification for military action."

"We would prefer to have another regime. Is it the focus of this international action coalition that we hope to put together? Is it the objective of the resolution? No," Straw said.

The U.N. Security Council will begin debate Wednesday October 16 on Iraq, council president Martin Belinga-Eboutou of Cameroon said Friday October 11.

South African U.N. Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo requested the debate in a letter to Belinga-Eboutou written on behalf of the non-aligned nations movement.

In it, Kumalo alluded to an earlier letter from the movement which "emphasized the urgent need for a peaceful solution to the issue of Iraq."

The debate will coincide with intense diplomatic maneuvering, which began Thursday October 10, when British Prime Minister Tony Blair flew to Russia to convince President Vladimir Putin of the need for a tough new U.N. resolution threatening force.

Putin, according to a Russian government official, said yes to a new resolution but no to any threat of force, although those talks were continuing late Friday.

Council members have for more than a month been considering the demand of the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush for a resolution defining tough new conditions for U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq.

Earlier, a senior U.S. State Department official said Washington rejected as unacceptable Iraq's response to demands from U.N. weapons inspectors for their return to the country.

"It's a page-and-a-half of rhetoric that says everything but 'yes'," the official said on condition of anonymity.

"It ignores the requirements specified by the inspectors in their letter, it does not reply directly to their letter and even throws in a request for reimbursement.

"Once again, Iraq is trying to evade its responsibility and is playing games with the inspectors. We don't think very much of it. It demonstrates once again that the UN Security Council needs to take action."

Earlier, the Iraqi letter was leaked to reporters at the United Nations.

In it, Iraq told the world body it was ready to receive U.N. arms inspectors next week, but continued to insist its sovereignty be respected and demanded payment for services such as equipment and minders.

The letter confirmed some points of an agreement reached in two days of talks in Vienna last week.

The letter was addressed to Hans Blix, chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission and to Mohamed El-Baradei, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

"We confirm our full readiness to receiving the advance team of the UNMOVIC and the IAEA on October 19," it said.

The letter was a reply to a 20-paragraph note which Blix and El-Baradei sent Tuesday October 8, to El-Sadi asking for written confirmation of practical arrangements agreed in Vienna.

It said the contents of a joint news conference in Vienna on October 1, and a briefing by Blix and El-Baradei to the UN Security Council two days later, "correspond to what we have agreed upon in Vienna regarding the practical arrangements."