Security Council Calls Iraq’s Posturing ‘Totally Unacceptable’

The U.N. Security Council on Thursday called Baghdad’s latest refusal to cooperate with weapons inspectors “totally unacceptable” and urged the government of President Saddam Hussein to immediately resume disarmament efforts.

At the same time, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan held out a diplomatic carrot to Iraq, proposing a “comprehensive review” of Baghdad’s cooperation with the weapons inspection process. The new review, he said, would “engage the Iraqis more closely than we have hitherto.”

“Maybe the time has come for all of us to make a comprehensive reassessment of where we stand,” Annan said. “In return, we’ll look to the day when Iraq and the Iraqi people can return to the family of nations.”

The diplomatic activity came in response to Baghdad’s announcement Wednesday that it was suspending cooperation with U.N. weapons inspections until several conditions are met, including a restructuring of the commission in charge of the program, a change in its leadership and the relocation of its headquarters from the United States to Europe.

President Clinton called Hussein’s actions a “misguided attempt” to divide the international community and warned that it will only perpetuate international economic sanctions imposed after Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, which triggered the Persian Gulf War.

“Unless Iraq reverses course and cooperates fully with the international weapons inspectors, the United States will stop any and all efforts to alter the sanctions regime,” the president said in a statement.

Bill Richardson, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said that unless the Iraqis back down from their demands, they will be viewed as international “outlaws.” He added that he was “very pleased with the outcome” and the “forcefulness” of the U.N. response to Hussein’s latest intransigence.

But the statement issued by the Security Council also struck a conciliatory note by hinting that the U.N. may act in the near future to ease the sanctions. “After a period of improved cooperation and some tangible progress,” the statement said, the council “intends to respond favorably to future progress made in the disarmament process.”

Annan, speaking at a news conference held after the closed-door Security Council deliberations, disclosed that he had spoken earlier in the day with Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tarik Aziz and that Baghdad’s position is “not closed.”

Annan said he told Aziz that Iraq has no authority to impose new conditions on its cooperation with weapons inspections.

At the same time, the U.N. leader said he saw no immediate need to use force.

U.S. analysts suggested that Iraq may interpret Annan’s offer to conduct a collaborative review as an indirect concession that could encourage Hussein to hold out for more rather than to reverse course.

“He’ll see this as a foot in the door to getting the whole sanctions regime reviewed with an eye to voting it up or down again. He’ll see this as a way to begin getting out of sanctions,” said Judith Yaphe, an Iraq expert at National Defense University in Washington.

Annan attributed Iraq’s actions to growing frustration with the international community. Officials in Baghdad appear to believe that “whatever they do has not been recognized by [the weapons inspectors] or the Security Council,” he said. “The frustrations came through, if not desperation.”

According to Clinton administration officials, Iraq appears to have been preparing for the latest showdown for several weeks.

One key signal was Hussein’s recent order to relocate every unit of the elite Republican Guards to different garrisons.

“We believe that Saddam was preparing for some kind of new challenge,” said a senior U.S. official. “Prior to doing so he wanted to make sure that he had shaken up his forces so he had them where he wanted them. . . . It’s a sure-fire signal that he’s expecting a period of stress and tension.”

In addition, Washington noted a consistent increase in Iraqi rhetoric challenging the actions of chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler.

In some respects, U.S. officials said, Washington is better positioned for the confrontation than it was during a similar showdown earlier this year. Then, the United States threatened to use force and had to deploy thousands of new troops and additional warships and warplanes. But the showdown ended in February when Annan mediated a compromise regarding U.N. access to sensitive “presidential sites.”

A subsequent interagency review led the Pentagon to reposition U.S. military forces in the strategic Persian Gulf to increase American striking power, including doubling the number of cruise missiles in the region, the senior official noted. This redeployment will allow the United States to strike at Iraqi targets from offshore, reducing U.S. reliance on facilities in countries that are reluctant to support the use of force.

“If Hussein takes additional steps which threaten regional stability, we reserve the right to use force at the time and place of our own choosing,” the official said. “And this time it will be much easier.”

The United States, which led the international coalition formed after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait, also believes that it can exert more leverage because of its proposal last spring to expand the U.N.-administered “oil-for-food” program.

The U.N. more than doubled the amount of oil Iraq is allowed to sell to pay for humanitarian supplies, to more than $10 billion annually. The increase already has begun to alleviate the human suffering that Hussein repeatedly exploited in appealing to the world to lift sanctions.

“The change allows the Iraqi people to be well-fed, but not well-armed,” the senior official said.

Under the expanded program, profits from oil exports are basically controlled by the U.N., which distributes the funds. Part of the profits also goes to war reparations to Kuwait and other parties.

Under the previous program, Iraq controlled a large part of the production and managed to smuggle oil across borders.

“If [Saddam] doesn’t cooperate, sanctions will stay in perpetuity,” the U.S. official said. “And the beauty is that his people won’t suffer.”

The loss of control over his nation’s oil production is believed to be part of the reason Hussein opted to provoke another showdown over weapons inspections, U.S. officials said.