 |
| |
|
|
Oerdin
|
 |
of Internet Music.
Sep 2001
time: 21:25
|
|
I know we already have several threads on Iraq but this one is going to deal with an entirely different topic; that being tension in the trans-Atlantic alliance. Will it cause a perminent break between the Franco-German axis and those members which back action against Saddam or is the current impass just a passing event?
To kick off debate I'm going to quote a recent CNN article where the leaders of NATO members Britain, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, appealed for unity in the bloc.
quote:
"The transatlantic relationship must not become a casualty of the current Iraqi regime's persistent attempts to threaten world security," the eight leaders wrote. "Our strength lies in unity.
"The Iraqi regime and its weapons of mass destruction represent a clear threat to world security," the premiers wrote in a thinly-veiled appeal to doubters French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder to join up.
The newspaper article signed by Britain's Tony Blair, Italy's Silvio Berlusconi, Spain's Jose Maria Aznar, Portugal's Jose Barroso, Denmark's Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Czech Republic's Vaclav Havel, Poland's Leszek Miller and Hungary's Peter Medgyessy was hailed by the Bush administration as evidence of wider support in Europe than had been reported.
CNN's Walter Rodgers says that the White House hopes that it has isolated France and Germany and that President Jacques Chirac and Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder now feel that isolation.
But at the United Nations in New York the split between world nations over Iraq was evident as 11 of the 15 members of the U.N. Security Council canvassed by The Associated Press supported giving more time to weapons inspectors to pursue Iraq's peaceful disarmament.
France, Russia and China, who all have veto power, want more time, as well as Germany, Mexico, Chile, Guinea, Cameroon, Syria, Angola and Pakistan, diplomats told AP.
Only Bulgaria and Spain backed the United States and Britain in focusing on Iraq's failures rather than continued inspections, AP said.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush's closest ally in the war on terror he declared after the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, has been battling to persuade his EU counterparts to back Bush's hardline stance toward Iraq.
The idea for the joint article originated not with Blair but with Aznar, Reuters reported.
White House officials said they welcomed the declaration as proof of Europe's support for President Bush's position. It also proves that only a minority of European nations are opposed to Bush's stance regarding Iraq, they said.
Blair met Berlusconi in London on Wednesday evening and is due to drop in on Aznar on Thursday on his way to meet Bush at Camp David on Friday for what many believe will be final talks to fine-tune strategy before war starts with Iraq.
The eight European leaders said it was vital that all EU nations were seen to support U.N. resolution 1441 which paved the way for weapons inspectors to re-enter Iraq and resume their search for chemical, nuclear and biological arms.
"We sent a clear, firm and unequivocal message that we would rid the world of the danger posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. We must remain united in insisting that his regime is disarmed," they wrote.
"We know that success in the day-to-day battle against terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction demands unwavering determination and firm international cohesion on the part of all countries for whom freedom is precious," they said in the statement.
"The attacks of September 11 showed just how far terrorists -- the enemies of our common values -- are prepared to go to destroy them. Those outrages were an attack on all of us. In standing firm in defence of these principles, the governments and people of the U.S. and Europe have amply demonstrated the strength of their convictions. Today more than ever, the transatlantic bond is a guarantee of our freedom."
Hans Blix, the U.N.'s chief weapons inspector, said on Monday quantities of anthrax, nerve gas and chemical weapons warheads remained unaccounted for, and accused the Iraqi government of hampering investigations.
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Wednesday he would next week present evidence proving Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction as well as linking Baghdad to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network.
But Germany's Schroeder insisted that even if Washington, which is pouring troops and armour into the Gulf, did provide conclusive proof of its claims on February 5, he would still bid to avoid war with Baghdad.
The eight leaders, stating they had no quarrel with the Iraqi people, begged to differ, arguing that a failure by Iraq to comply with the U.N. Security Council resolutions undermined the body and threatened the world.
"Our goal is to safeguard world peace and security by ensuring that this regime gives up its weapons of mass destruction. Our governments have a common responsibility to face this threat," they wrote.
"If they are not complied with, the Security Council will lose its credibility and world peace will suffer as a result," they added.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:25
|
|
Nah, TheStinger, Schroeder was the first to announce, that "Germany supports America, but is not willing to take part in adventures". If he hadn't done this in the last August, he wouldn't have been reelected for sure(heck, and I didn't even vote for him, but still...). I personally don't like him, his domestic policy is horrible, his foreign policy poor, but I support his policy against the war in Iraq. So does an overwhelming majority of all Germans in particular and Europeans as a whole. If other governments decide to ignore the will of their citizens, it's their thing. Although somebody tell me, what this has to do with democracy.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
TheStinger
|
 |
International crime fighting playboy
Apr 2002
time: 05:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Nah, TheStinger, Schroeder was the first to announce, that "Germany supports America, but is not willing to take part in adventures". If he hadn't done this in the last August, he wouldn't have been reelected for sure(heck, and I didn't even vote for him, but still...). I personally don't like him, his domestic policy is horrible, his foreign policy poor, but I support his policy against the war in Iraq. So does an overwhelming majority of all Germans in particular and Europeans as a whole. If other governments decide to ignore the will of their citizens, it's their thing. Although somebody tell me, what this has to do with democracy. |
The majority of europeans would advocate not allowing any more asylum seekers to come in(including the very genuine ones). but i bet you don't agree with that
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:25
|
|
Key points
"All of us are bound by Security Council Resolution 1441, which was adopted unanimously."
Unanimously - IE by France and Russia too. Any obejection by them now must be in terms of 1441, not on the basis of using inspections for containment, or a requirment for the US to show a smoking gun which were not in 1441. Its too late for France or the UNSC to go back on 1441.
" Resolution 1441 is Saddam Hussein?s last chance to disarm using peaceful means."
LAST CHANCE - no more new chances
"The opportunity to avoid greater confrontation rests with him. Sadly this week the UN weapons inspectors have confirmed that his long-established pattern of deception, denial and non-compliance with UN Security Council resolutions is continuing."
they didnt come right out and say "material breach" as UK has, but came pretty close.
"Europe has no quarrel with the Iraqi people. Indeed, they are the first victims of Iraq?s current brutal regime. "
This will be a war for liberation, not colonialism or hegemony.
"The United Nations Charter charges the Security Council with the task of preserving international peace and security. To do so, the Security Council must maintain its credibility by ensuring full compliance with its resolutions. We cannot allow a dictator to systematically violate those Resolutions. If they are not complied with, the Security Council will lose its credibility and world peace will suffer as a result. "
Uh M. Chirac - are you really sure you want to take down the UNSC just to inconvenience the "hyperpower"?
"We are confident that the Security Council will face up to its responsibilities."
Damn straight!!!!
"José María Aznar, Spain
José Manuel Durão Barroso, Portugal
Silvio Berlusconi, Italy
Tony Blair, United Kingdom
Václav Havel, Czech Republic
Peter Medgyessy, Hungary
Leszek Miller, Poland
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Denmark"
Note especially the voice of Mr. Havel.
It would be interesting to have him in a room with Mr. Mandela and discuss international morality of this, no??
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CerberusIV
|
|
The Franco-German position probably doesn't have that much to do with Iraq. It sounds more like the latest round of "Should Europe have a common defence/foreign policy led by France/Germany or should the EU countries each go their own way".
There has been a bit of political infighting recently about enlarging the EU which has contributed to this.
The crunch will come when the UN has to vote on explicitly authorising war on Iraq.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-01-2003 18:47
So anyone who disagrees with them is nothing more then a brainwashed American lacky? 
|