Powell's UN address

In the more than 50-year history of the Security Council, the United Nations' most important body, this is the first time that the representative from one of the five permanent members -- the United States -- has presented his country's case in such a convincing manner, supported by electronic evidence, exhibited by Secretary of State Colin Powell on Wednesday.

For almost 90 minutes, Gen. (ret) Colin Powell did his utmost to convince the Security Council members, especially the other four who wield veto powers, that Iraq presents a serious threat to world peace. He referred many times to the Council's Resolution 1441, unanimously agreed upon last November, which is intended to pressure Iraq to rid itself voluntarily of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and cooperate fully with a visiting team of UN inspectors to verify Iraq's readiness to comply with the said resolution.

After presenting the Council with proof and arguments that Iraq had not complied with resolution 1441, Secretary Powell submitted his final conclusion. "I believe the conclusion is irreparable and undeniable. Iraq has now put itself in danger of the serious consequences called for in Resolution 1441 and this body (The United Nations) places itself in danger of irrelevancy if it allows Iraq to continue to defy its will without responding effectively and immediately," he said.

Secretary of State Powell's lengthy speech essentially consisted of three distinct parts: the first sought to prove on the basis of intercepted conversations between Iraqi military officers and officials working for the Organization of Military Industrialization, satellite photographs and interviews with sources who managed to escape, that President Saddam Hussein has been playing a dangerous game of "cat and mouse" with the UN team of inspectors. Photographic evidence was shown of sites and bunkers where chemical weapons were stored, but they had been cleaned up before the inspectors arrived. Chemical materials consisting of nerve agents were stored in modified vehicles that could be moved from one place to another.

The second part of the speech revealed that President Saddam Hussein's government was working with the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, refuting speculation that Saddam Hussein's secular regime and al-Qaeda's religious fanaticism constituted an improbable mix. "Ambitions and hatred are enough to bring Iraq and al-Qaeda together, enough that Al-Qaeda could learn how to build more sophisticated bombs and learn how to forge documents, and enough, too, that Al-Qaeda could turn to Iraq for help in acquiring expertise on weapons of mass destruction," Secretary Powell told the Council.

The Secretary pointed out that one of Osama bin Laden's associates, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, was allowed to maintain his terrorist network in Iraq. The United States' concern is clear enough, which is that Al-Qaeda, with Iraqi help, could obtain WMDs and could be assisted in handling those weapons so that the organization could once again operate effectively.

The third part of Secretary Powell's address, which he said should be the continuing concern of the Security Council, concerned the damning human rights record of the Saddam Hussein regime. The speech stressed the use of mustard and nerve gas against the Iraqi-Kurdish population that caused thousands of victims in 1988, the practice of ethnic cleansing and the ruthless practices of a paranoid police state.

Our guess is that Secretary Powell's lengthy speech was aimed at achieving at least two objectives in case the U.S. should deem it necessary to propose a follow-up resolution as a mandate to attack Iraq: To prevent France from applying its veto as its foreign minister had earlier indicated it might do, and to assure at least nine supporting votes (from the 15 total members). On the other hand, President Bush and his senior officials have on several occasions made it clear that the U.S. would attack Iraq, with or without the support of a specific Security Council resolution.

It could well be that, at the outcome of this round of debates in the Security Council, the U.S. may postpone any military action in Iraq for several weeks. It is clear, however, that an attack would have to take place before summer sets in and temperatures soar to more than 49 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit). In all likelihood, some Security Council members may resign themselves to the fact that the U.S. will go ahead and attack Iraq, no matter what objections get raised. However, the mood that prevails in most parts of the world is, as stated by the spokesman of the Indonesian ministry of foreign affairs spokesman, Marty Natalegawa -- namely that the U.S. should delay military action for some time and give the UN arms inspectors more time to finish their work.

What actually may transpire is that the U.S. and those members of the Security Council who are skeptical about Washington's keenness to attack Iraq -- such as France, China and Germany -- will continue to try and work out a formulation that on the one hand would give the UN arms inspectors more time to finish their work, while on the other acquiescing to the U.S., and UK, to do what they believe is necessary.