================================================
I wonder when the world would be brave enough to tell the Yanks
to just lay off and learn a little bit of humility.
I have had nuff of their nonsense and selfishness.
Dave
=================================================
FROM THE GUARDIAN
Tuesday April 16, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4394862,00.html
-------------------------
Chemical coup d'etat
The US wants to depose the diplomat who could take away its
pretext for war with Iraq
George Monbiot
On Sunday, the US government will launch an international
coup. It has been planned for a month. It will be executed
quietly, and most of us won't know what is happening until
it's too late. It is seeking to overthrow 60 years of
multilateralism in favour of a global regime built on force.
The coup begins with its attempt, in five days' time, to
unseat the man in charge of ridding the world of chemical
weapons. If it succeeds, this will be the first time that
the head of a multilateral agency will have been deposed in
this manner. Every other international body will then become
vulnerable to attack. The coup will also shut down the
peaceful options for dealing with the chemical weapons Iraq
may possess, helping to ensure that war then becomes the
only means of destroying them.
The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
(OPCW) enforces the chemical weapons convention. It inspects
labs and factories and arsenals and oversees the destruction
of the weapons they contain. Its director-general is a
workaholic Brazilian diplomat called Jose Bustani. He has,
arguably, done more in the past five years to promote world
peace than anyone else on earth. His inspectors have
overseen the destruction of 2 million chemical weapons and
two-thirds of the world's chemical weapon facilities. He has
so successfully cajoled reluctant nations that the number of
signatories to the convention has risen from 87 to 145 in
the past five years: the fastest growth rate of any
multilateral body in recent times.
In May 2000, as a tribute to his extraordinary record,
Bustani was re-elected unanimously by the member states for
a second five-year term, even though he had yet to complete
his first one. Last year Colin Powell wrote to him to thank
him for his "very impressive" work. But now everything has
changed. The man celebrated for his achievements has been
denounced as an enemy of the people.
In January, with no prior warning or explanation, the US
state department asked the Brazilian government to recall
him, on the grounds that it did not like his "management
style". This request directly contravenes the chemical
weapons convention, which states "the director-general ...
shall not seek or receive instructions from any government".
Brazil refused. In March the US government accused Bustani
of "financial mismanagement", "demoralisation" of his staff,
"bias" and "ill-considered initiatives". It warned that if
he wanted to avoid damage to his reputation, he must resign.
Again, the US was trampling the convention, which insists
that member states shall "not seek to influence" the staff.
He refused to go. On March 19 the US proposed a vote of no
confidence in Bustani. It lost. So it then did something
unprecedented in the history of multi lateral diplomacy. It
called a "special session" of the member states to oust him.
The session begins on Sunday. And this time the US is likely
to get what it wants.
Since losing the vote last month, the United States, which
is supposed to be the organisation's biggest donor, has been
twisting the arms of weaker nations, refusing to pay its
dues unless they support it, with the result that the OPCW
could go under. Last week Bustani told me, "the Europeans
are so afraid that the US will abandon the convention that
they are prepared to sacrifice my post to keep it on board".
His last hope is that the United Kingdom, whose record of
support for the organisation has so far been exemplary, will
make a stand. The meeting on Sunday will present Tony
Blair's government with one of the clearest choices it has
yet faced between multilateralism and the "special
relationship".
The US has not sought to substantiate the charges it has
made against Bustani. The OPCW is certainly suffering from a
financial crisis, but that is largely because the US
unilaterally capped its budget and then failed to pay what
it owed. The organisation's accounts have just been audited
and found to be perfectly sound. Staff morale is higher than
any organisation as underfunded as the OPCW could reasonably
expect. Bustani's real crimes are contained in the last two
charges, of "bias" and "ill-considered initiatives".
The charge of bias arises precisely because the OPCW is not
biased. It has sought to examine facilities in the United
States with the same rigour with which it examines
facilities anywhere else. But, just like Iraq, the US has
refused to accept weapons inspectors from countries it
regards as hostile to its interests, and has told those who
have been allowed in which parts of a site they may and may
not inspect. It has also passed special legislation
permitting the president to block unannounced inspections,
and banning inspectors from removing samples of its
chemicals.
"Ill-considered initiatives" is code for the attempts
Bustani has made, in line with his mandate, to persuade
Saddam Hussein to sign the chemical weapons convention. If
Iraq agrees, it will then be subject to the same
inspections - both routine and unannounced - as any other
member state (with the exception, of course, of the United
States). Bustani has so far been unsuccessful, but only
because, he believes, he has not yet received the backing of
the UN security council, with the result that Saddam knows
he would have little to gain from signing.
Bustani has suggested that if the security council were to
support the OPCW's bid to persuade Iraq to sign, this would
provide the US with an alternative to war. It is hard to see
why Saddam Hussein would accept weapons inspectors from
Unmovic - the organisation backed by the security council -
after its predecessor, Unscom, was found to be stuffed with
spies planted by the US government. It is much easier to see
why he might accept inspectors from an organisation which
has remained scrupulously even-handed. Indeed, when Unscom
was thrown out of Iraq in 1998, the OPCW was allowed in to
complete the destruction of the weapons it had found.
Bustani has to go because he has proposed the solution to a
problem the US does not want solved.
"What the Americans are doing," Bustani says, "is a coup
d'etat. They are using brute force to amend the convention
and unseat the director-general." As the chemical weapons
convention has no provisions permitting these measures, the
US is simply ripping up the rules. If it wins, then the
OPCW, like Unscom, will be fatally compromised. Success for
the United States on Sunday would threaten the independence
of every multilateral body.
This is, then, one of those rare occasions on which our
government could make a massive difference to the way the
world is run. It could choose to support its closest ally,
wrecking multilateralism and shutting down the alternatives
to war. Or it could defy the United States in defence of
world peace and international law. It will take that
principled stand only if we, the people from whom it draws
its power, make so much noise that it must listen. We have
five days in which to stop the US from bullying its way to
war.
www.monbiot.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
