 |
|
Blix, who earlier refused any U.S. pressure, had a change of heart after meeting Powell
|
Additional
Reporting By IOL Correspondent
WASHINGTON,
October 5 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - Despite a press conference
by some members of Congress expressing their opposition to a war on
Iraq, the U.S. Congress on Friday, October 4, inched closer to granting
President George W. Bush his long-sought approval for a pre-emptive
strike against Iraq. However, U.S. officials admit they still lack
enough support in the Security Council.
Congress
was poised to grant George W. Bush approval for a pre-emptive strike
against Iraq, ahead of a speech by the U.S. President Monday, October 7,
in which he will outline reasons for seeking military action against
Baghdad, reported Agence France-Presse (AFP).
The
House of Representatives on Wednesday, October 2, agreed to give Bush
broad authority to use military force against Iraq.
After
the U.S. Senate debated the matter Friday, supporters were confident
that that body would approve a resolution in the coming week, most
likely on Wednesday or Thursday, October 9, 10.
"The
atmosphere around the resolution has matured. And while it's very
serious, I also think it's calm," said Senate Minority Leader Trent
Lott, a Republican who supports the resolution.
The
measure appeared almost to be a fait accompli, since no Congress in the
post-World War II era has ever denied a president's wishes to approve a
resolution authorizing the use of force.
Nevertheless,
opponents were vociferous in their disapproval, particularly among
Senate Democrats.
"Our
first priority should be the successful completion of the war on
terrorism," said Senator Bob Graham, a Democrat from Florida and
chairman of the Intelligence Committee, in a speech on the Senate floor.
"Today,
we Americans are more vulnerable to international terrorist
organizations than we are to [Iraqi leader] Saddam Hussein," Graham
said.
Bush's
spokesman said the president hoped Monday's speech would sway detractors
in the congress and in the public at large.
"As
Congress begins the debate... it's important and it's helpful to members
of Congress in both parties for them to hear what the president
thinks," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said.
"The
country will benefit from an opportunity to hear the president reflect
on the reasons that Saddam Hussein is such a clear threat to the United
States," Fleischer said.
Bush
and his administration are exerting maximum efforts to sell their
desired strike against Iraq, both domestically and abroad, as “a
campaign to topple Saddam Hussein”, ignoring the expected huge cost of
lives among the innocent Iraq civilians, observers believe.
Arab
American political activists in Washington D.C. also see the Congress
standing behind the president, although they have stated that the
approval will be a watered down version of the Bush’s demands for
unabated presidential decision-making power.
Khalil
Jahshan, Vice President of the American Arab Ant-Discrimination
Committee and Khaled Saffuri, of the Islamic Institute (II), joined
Al-Jazeera’s Hafiz al-Mirazi on the weekly program “Min Washington
(From Washington)” on Friday evening to discuss the country’s move
towards approving Bush’s decision to wage war on Iraq.
Both
Arab American leaders stated that there would almost definitely be
Congressional support of the president’s moves in regards to Iraq but
that his requests for unchecked power would not be granted.
While
some members of Congress hosted a news conference on The Hill stating
their opposition to a war on Iraq, many believe that their opposition
will be in vain.
During
the press conference, Representative Janice Schakowsky (D-Ill) held up a
large stack of letters against a war with Iraq and raised only a small
stack of letters supporting a war.
She
was joined by fellow members of Congress Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John
Conyers (D-MI), Jose Serrano (D-NY) and Maxine Waters (D-CA), who also
expressed their opposition. These members of Congress have been very
supportive of the Arab American community and have voiced protest to the
current sanctions imposed on Iraq.
Meanwhile,
the chief United Nations arms inspector on Friday threw his weight
behind moves toward a new U.N. Security Council resolution on Iraq, but
U.S. officials admitted they lack the support for the tough resolution
they want.
U.S.
Secretary of State Colin Powell and national security advisor Condoleeza
Rice discussed moves toward sending a new disarmament mission to Iraq
with chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix.
The
United States does not want inspectors to return to Iraq until a new
resolution is passed by the Security Council setting out conditions for
a mission and warning Saddam that he would face action if he does not
comply.
"I
think the Security Council resolution that is now being discussed is one
that I think I would welcome," said Blix, who briefed the Security
Council on Thursday.
"This
would further clarify matters. We welcome this effort and I have the
impression that... there is broad support [among council members] for
having a new resolution."
Blix
would not comment on the debate on the form of the resolution, while
Powell said he was "optimistic" that a firm resolution could
still be agreed.
Russia
has strongly opposed any new resolution saying that the United Nations
should concentrate on quickly getting inspectors back into Iraq.
The
debate has been complicated by France's insistence that there should be
two resolutions, with only the second specifying the use of military
force.
After
a week of intense diplomacy, the United States and Britain still lack
sufficient support to pass a single, tough resolution on Iraq and may be
forced to agree to two resolutions, U.S. and U.N. officials said.
Russia
or France could veto any resolution as permanent members of the Security
Council, with the United States, Britain and China.
In
addition to the veto threat, the U.S.-British proposal is opposed by a
majority of the elected members, the officials said.
The
split would leave the United States and Britain with little choice but
to accept a French proposal for two resolutions, the officials said.
France
said Friday that moves to send U.N. weapons inspectors back into Iraq
should go ahead, despite U.S. attempts to hold them back.
"There
is currently no obstacle to continuing preparations for the inspectors'
mission," foreign ministry spokesman Francois Rivasseau told
reporters.
U.S.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher on Friday refused to confirm
that a compromise was likely but did admit that the debate was
"intricate and intense."
Stepping
up its campaign against Iraq, the U.S. Defense Department said it had
detected signs that Iraq was trying to conceal weapons of mass
destruction before any inspections take place.
The
Pentagon did not give details of Iraq's efforts to hide its chemical and
biological weapons, but spokeswoman Victoria Clarke said they were
intended to divert any inspections which may be approved by the U.N.
Security Council.
The
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) said separately that U.S. intelligence
had concluded that Iraq has resumed production of chemical warfare
agents and has a large scale biological weapons production capability.
A
CIA document said that "since [U.N.] inspections ended in 1998,
Iraq has maintained its chemical weapons effort, energized its missile
program, and invested more heavily in biological weapons; most analysts
assess Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."
It
said Iraq had largely rebuilt missile and biological weapons facilities
damaged during 1998 U.S.-British air strikes and expanded chemical and
biological infrastructure under the cover of civilian production.
"Baghdad
has begun renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably
including mustard, sarin, cyclosarin, and VX," it said.
