US claims right to attack Iraq
By Norm Dixon
The 15-member UN Security Council on March 2 unanimously passed a resolution threatening Iraq with the "severest consequences" should it renege on the deal signed with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan to allow UN weapons inspectors access to all sites.
The US immediately announced that the vote gave it the right to launch a military attack on Iraq in the event of a breach. Other members of the Security Council deny that the resolution threatens an "automatic" resort to force.
Bill Richardson, US ambassador to the UN, said, "This resolution is drafted as such so it is perfectly clear that any member state can take unilateral action if that member state feels there is a grievous violation".
US State Department spokesperson James Rubin added, "We've made clear that we don't see the need to return to the Security Council if there is a violation".
Only Britain publicly shared the US interpretation. France, Russia, China — which all have a veto in the council — and non-permanent members Costa Rica, Brazil, Portugal and Sweden all agreed that only a full meeting of the Security Council can approve a military strike.
Japan, which co-sponsored the motion with Britain, also denied the resolution endorsed an automatic strike.
The Washington Post on March 3 reported that the US refused to accept a resolution explicitly stating that only the full council could approve an attack, thus leaving it deliberately ambiguous.
"After a weekend of intense negotiation, a compromise was worked out that one diplomat described as 'finessing the issue by burying it in fuzzy language'. The resolution states that the Security Council 'decides to remain actively seized of the matter, in order to ensure implementation of this resolution, and to secure peace and security in the area'", the Post reported.