Replies

BBC November 8, 2002

Timetable: Next steps on Iraq

After nearly two months of diplomatic wrangling, the United States has won UN approval to force Saddam Hussein to disarm or face "serious consequences" that analysts say would almost certainly mean war.

A UN Security Council resolution gives a timeframe of up to 15 weeks for a final verdict on whether or not the Iraqi leader is developing weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles.

While the resolution has removed any automatic resort to force against Iraq, if Baghdad is deemed to have impeded the work of UN arms inspectors, Washington would not have to wait for UN approval before taking military action.

The timetable according to the resolution:

Iraq has seven days to accept the resolution after it has been adopted. Analysts say it is likely to accept its terms as a rejection would almost certainly trigger war.
Iraq then has up to 30 days to declare any of its chemical, biological, nuclear and delivery programmes. The US has made it clear that failure to provide a full reckoning will amount to a "material breach" of Iraq's obligations, which correspondents say would provide a pretext for war.
Weapons inspectors must have resumed work in Iraq within 45 days of the resolution being passed. However, correspondents say chief weapons inspector Hans Blix intends to travel to Iraq within two weeks of the resolution being passed.
The inspectors have 60 days to report on their progress to the Security Council. It is not clear from the draft resolution whether the clock runs from the day they arrive in Iraq. However, at any point the inspectors can decide that their work is being obstructed.

If weapons inspectors find that Iraq has failed to cooperate with their work, then the US would discuss the consequences with Security Council members, but would not have to wait for another UN resolution before taking military action.

The US would have to take into account if any debate with members of the Security Council lasted too long, conditions for troops in Iraq would begin to become dangerous.

According to GlobalSecurity.org temperatures in the Iraqi desert will begin to heat up by March. In July and August, the average temperature is higher than 48 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit).

Troops will have to be dressed in chemical protection gear the whole time, which will become unbearably hot.

Also, April marks the beginning of Iraq's windy season, when sandstorms would severely reduce air operations.

The weather would not cool down again until October.

Thanks for this post, it lays out the facts so well!

Although it would seem that we would shoot for optimal weather conditions and attack prior to April, there are some good reasons why we wouldn't: biological and chemical agents breakdown and become useless /impossible to put on target in such weather, it would provide good cover for troops with systems that can handle the weather anyway. Also, our intelligence gathering has got to be improving with leaps and bounds. The optimal scenario would be for Saddam to allow weapons inspectors, and as he pushes the envelope pretending to cooperate, intelligence forces arrange an assination/internal coup