Posted on 02/05/2003 5:52:28 PM PST by kattracks
No change in position despite 'persuasive' U.S. argument
OTTAWA - Despite a "disturbing and persuasive" argument that Iraq is trying to deceive UN weapons inspectors, Canada will await further word from the inspectors themselves before deciding whether to join the United States in any military response.
Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham said today that U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell made a convincing presentation to the UN Security Council suggesting that "Iraq seems to be trying to fool" UN teams searching Iraq for caches of forbidden weapons.
But, Graham added, Canada will await the decision of the council later this month before deciding on a course of action.
We are not at a point where there is a need to use force," he told a news conference. "However, we don't have much time left."
Graham was reacting to Powell's long-awaited speech at the UN, in which he detailed U.S. allegations that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein has defied UN demands to rid his country of chemical and biological weapons.
The minister said the matter rests with Hans Blix, the chief arms inspector, who is to return to Iraq this weekend and will report back to the council Feb. 14.
"We need to give that inspection system a last chance, maybe one, maybe two, over a couple of weeks," Graham said. "If Dr. Blix comes back with a report saying that under no circumstances has Saddam Hussein any intention of co-operation with the inspectors at that point ... the other consequences have to flow."
Saddam has to show he's willing to disarm and to co-operate. If he doesn't, "the world has to take action to enforce its resolution," Graham said.
Powell outlined a circumstantial case, including satellite photos, intercepted communications and the word of unidentified informants, which suggested that Iraq maintains stocks of chemical and biological weapons and is hiding them from inspection.
Graham said he was impressed by Powell's willingness to use top secret material, even against the advice of security authorities.
"One thing that was somewhat surprising to me was the fairly extensive use of highly classified security materials, which usually the United States and other governments are very reluctant to provide," Graham said.
While he said Powell didn't provide a smoking gun, he did show a suspicious pattern of conduct by Iraq.
Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper urged the government to side firmly with the United States, which says it will act unilaterally against Iraq if it deems such a move necessary, even without approval from the world body.
"What is the benefit now of giving Saddam Hussein the benefit of the doubt?" Harper asked the House of Commons.
Outside the House, Harper said Canada should take a stern stand.
"I think we should declare with our allies that Iraq is in material breach (of UN demands) and in order to increase the pressure on Saddam Hussein, that we should be redeploying in the Gulf region."
Alexa McDonough of the NDP told the House that Powell's "so-called evidence" proved nothing. Her party's position is that nothing justifies war against Iraq.
The Canadian Arab Federation said Canada should be trying to restrain the apparent U.S. zeal for war.
"Colin Powell is asking us all to take quite a big leap of faith ... to believe these assertions are proof that Iraq is producing weapons of mass destruction," said Audrey Jamal, the group's executive director.
She said she wants to see a diplomatic solution.
There were others who were suspicious about Powell's claims.
Shahina Siddiqui, a board member with the Canadian branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations said Powell was repeating old claims.
"I don't find it a convincing argument for war," he said.
He brushed off the tapes of alleged intercepted communications between Iraqi officers.
"Those tape recordings, I'm sorry, but these days anything can be manufactured."
Imad Khadduri, a former Iraqi nuclear scientist who immigrated to Canada in 1999 and works as a college computer instructor in Toronto was equally skeptical.
"The so-called evidence provided is threadbare," he said. Allegations about nuclear weapons "are flimsy, they are not true and I can disprove all of them with facts, because I lived them."
He said he worked on Iraq's nuclear weapons program from 1968 until after the Gulf War, when the project was destroyed.
Powell is spreading "disinformation," he said.
Khadduri conceded, however, that he had no personal knowledge of chemical or biological weapons stock.
Brian MacDonald of the Atlantic Council, a think tank that tracks UN issues, said the problem is that people are asking the United States to prove its case against Iraq, when the onus should be on Saddam to prove he doesn't have banned weapons.
So far, Canada has said it will await the decision of the Security Council, but Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has not closed the door on joining the United States without further UN approval.
Un-freeping-believable. OK, chick, just make sure that when Muslim terrorists thank Canada for their porous borders by setting off a dirty bomb in downtown Toronto, you stand up and say that "nothing" justifies war against them.
BTW...Alexa, you'd be one of the first ones lined up against the wall and shot once they implemented sharia in the Islamic Republic of Canada. Of course Islamists can't have women in positions of political power.
None are so blind as those that refuse to see.
}:-)4
When Canadians are informed that they must now live under Sharia law, I will be unmoved.
I honestly don't understand people like this.
this excrement coming from a country ready to have a civil war about whether English or French should be the national language...
why am I not surprised???
BTW, weren't the first settlers in Canada French???
My solution would be for the US to airdrop small arms including handguns and ammunition for the Iraqi people and non-Republican Guard military to use. Not enough has been made of the fact that the Iraqis have no 2nd Amendment rights. Saddam rules because he disarmed the people as did the Taliban in Afganistan.
Better keep an eye on this guy. He left Iraq yet apparently still supports the government there. Sounds a bit suspicious.
For that, read: "Head still firmly positioned in lower alimentary canal".
In other words, Canadians are
A. Too stupid to decide.
B. Too pathetic too decide.
C. Too cowardly too decide.
D. We let others make our decisions for us.
F. All of the Above.
Count me as one vote for F, as in F for Canada.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.