***************************************************************
To: Multiple recipients of list mer-L <mer-L@middleeast.org>
Sender: owner-mer-L@middleeast.org
Reply-To: mer-L@middleeast.org
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 08:48:31 -0500
From: MID-EAST REALITIES <MER@middleeast.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: U.S. Still Prepares To Strike Iraq - MER LIE of the WEEK
- _______ ____ ______
/ ø/ / /___/ / /_ // M I D - E A S T R E A L I T I E S
/ /ø_/ / /_/_ / /ØØ Making Sense of the Middle East
/_/ /_/ /___/ /_/ ØØ
www.MiddleEast.Org BILL CLINTON - ONE MORE BIG LIE
__________________________________________________________________
TO RECEIVE MER REGULARLY EMAIL TO: INFOMER@MiddleEast.Org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
M I D - E A S T R E A L I T I E S
News, Information, & Analysis That Governments, Interest Groups,
and the Corporate Media Don't Want You To Know from Independent
Middle East Experts Around the World.
____________________________________________________________________
AMERICAN ARMADA POISED TO STRIKE -
U.N. ANXIOUSLY WATCHES
MER - Washington - 6 March:
If you want to find an excuse to do something, it's not that
difficult to do so. The U.S. military has much experience with
manufacturing "excuses" -- going way back to massacres of the Indians
to modern-day overthrowing of undesirable governments.
The Vietnam War began with the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, based on
a manufactured story only corrected decades later.
The Gulf War began with a very narrow Senate vote, based on
manufactured "evidence" that later was exposed as erroneous.
The recent U.N. debate specifically ruled out allowing the
Americans to decide if Iraq was in compliance with Security Council
resolutions, specifically ruled out any "authorization" for automatic
American attacks on Iraq. Nation after nation, including 3 of the 5
with veto power, specifically stated they would only vote for the
resolution if such an American interpretation did not apply. And
the U.N. Secretary-General has repeatedly stated, in his soft
diplomatese, that the American interpretation is not correct and
"consultations" are required.
Even so, the Americans continue with their unilateral inter-
pretations, continue to prepare their forces to strike, and continue
to manipulate public opinion to justify the near-genocide they
have already brought upon Iraq as well as what they have planned.
CLINTON'S CURRENT BIG LIE --
THIS ONE WITH HISTORICAL RAMIFICATIONS
"Iraq must fulfill without obstruction or delay
its commitment to open all of the nation to the
international weapons inspectors anyplace, anytime
without any condition, deadline or excuses.
"All the members of the Security Council agree
that failure to do so will result in 'severest
consequences.'
"The government of Iraq should be under no
illusion. The meaning of 'severest consequences'
is clear. It provides authority to act if Iraq
does not turn the commitment it has now made into
compliance."
President Bill Clinton
3/5/98
Additional background information can be found in this Associated
Press article on 3/4/98:
CLINTON VOWS TO PUNISH IRAQ IF ACCORD NOT KEPT
By Robert Burns
WASHINGTON - President Clinton said yesterday that Iraq should be
''under no illusion'' it would escape severe punishment if it violated a
pledge to permit unconditional UN weapons inspections. Aides said that
meant military action.
On a day in which the Pentagon announced it was speeding plans to give
anthrax vaccinations to the 36,000 US troops in the Persian Gulf,
Clinton praised a UN Security Council resolution endorsing Secretary
General Kofi Annan's agreement with Iraq on weapons inspections. The
resolution warned of ''severest consequences'' if Iraq failed to comply.
''The government of Iraq should be under no illusion,'' Clinton said.
''The meaning of `severest consequences' is clear.''
''It provides authority to act if Iraq does not turn the commitment
it has now made into compliance,'' he added. Hinting strongly that he
might feel compelled to use military force, Clinton said, ''No promise
of peace and no policy of patience can be without its limits.''
Other administration officials were more explicit on the question of a
military option.
''This gives us the green light to approach our policy of diplomacy
and force and it shows to the world once again that the onus of
complying with this agreement is with Iraq,'' US Ambassador Bill
Richardson said.
Even before Annan reached the accord with Iraq last week, the Clinton
administration maintained that previous UN Security Council resolutions
gave it the authority to use force against Iraq to ensure compliance.
Most other Security Council members dispute that view, and they still
question the American interpretation of Monday's resolution.
Envoys from many countries, including longtime US allies, said yesterday
that only the Security Council has the authority to determine whether
Iraq has breached the weapons inspections deal, and what should be
done in response. Almost alone, Britain shares the US view.
Before Monday's vote, China's UN ambassador, Qin Huasun, said Beijing
had insisted ''that there must not be any automatic authorization of
the use of force against in Iraq in this current resolution.''
Asked in an interview on NBC's ''Today'' show if the resolution gives
the green light for a US attack, Richardson replied, ''The answer is
yes. And we already had that green light.''
Clinton called on Iraq to demonstrate its commitment to the inspections
agreement - a deal many Republicans have criticized as weak and
unlikely to achieve US policy goals.
''Iraq must fulfill without obstruction or delay its commitment to open
all of the nation to the international weapons inspectors - any place,
any time, without any conditions, deadlines or excuses,'' he said.
At the State Department, spokesman James P. Rubin was asked by a
reporter if the Clinton administration believes military action would
be warranted if Iraq wavered on inspections.
''We'll make that judgment at the time and place of our choosing, but we
are making clear the principle underlying our policy, which is that a
violation of this agreement is one that will, in our view, justify
the use of military force,'' Rubin said.
A CBS News poll indicated most Americans approve of the UN agreement but
doubt that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein will keep his promise to allow
UN inspectors full access to suspected weapons sites.
__________________________________________________________________
MID-EAST REALITIES is published a number of times weekly and the
MERTV Program shows weekly on Cable TV.
Email to INFOMER@MIDDLEEAST.ORG to receive MER regularly.
M I D - E A S T R E A L I T I E S
MER@MiddleEast.Org / Fax: 202 362-6965 / Phone: 202 362-5266
********************************************************************