Unfortunately, ten years after the intervention in Iraq and people still harping the same tired, puerile talking points it's beyond the limits of my patience and time. At the moment I'm too busy with other projects.
So, instead I decided to post some op/eds of mine which appeared in Cafe Magazine from 2009 to 2012 (see separately) on Iraq and Afghanistan (see, "A Speech at West Point", "Obama: forcing a generation to grow up? West Point Part 2", "[Iraq] One of the great achievements of this administration?” Really?"; or links below).
They deal with statements made by President Obama and Vice President Biden attempting to either claim credit for Iraq, or praising the results of the intervention for their own personal political gain in full duplicity of their previous political positions.
The narrative that WMDs was "THE" only reason why President Bush forced the issue on Iraq is a canard. So the main point in all this, if any, is that we need to be informed and move away from the mere partisan talking points in matters such as this. One thing is political campaigning for office and another thing is what happens in office.
In all this debate one major thing is always omitted when approaching the topic from an assigning blame view. And that is the fact that the “war in Iraq” didn’t start in 2003. It was the reassuming of the responsibilities the UN had for the 1991 intervention and the 18-19 standing resolutions left on the table (especially Res. 678, 687, 1441). Corruption in the Oil-for-Food Programme involving members of the Security Counci prevented the UN to assume its responsibilities.
The situation faced by Bush and Obama, fighting an illegal enemy is like no other in American history, and American laws nor international laws were meant to include an international, borderless, nationless armed enemy. One thing is political campaigns and another the reality of the office.
The CIA director on whom Bush depended on and kept as a gesture of bi-partisanship, was a Clinton appointee.
There was no war in Iraq in 2003 initiated by Bush (and remember Bush had bi-partisan approval, the top Democrat leadership included). Bush re-assumed the activation of the cease fire/armistice agreed to in 1991 and violated by Saddam for 12 years, 8 of those under Clinton. It was Clinton in 1998 who made "regime change" American policy for Iraq ("The Iraq Liberation Act").
If the continuation in 2003 of the UN approved intervention of Iraq of 1991 was illegal, why then did the UN gave and extended a mandate to the coalition of willing nations? Because the operational concept of "coalition of willing nations" is a principle upheld by the UN Charter, based on the fact that by becoming a UN member no nation is required to resign to its sovereign right to self-defense. "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the UN." (UN Charter, Ch. VII, Art. 51)
President Clinton invoked this principle for his interventions in former Yugoslavia and Haiti.
Again, "If the continuation in 2003 of the UN approved intervention of Iraq of 1991 was illegal, why then did the UN gave and extended a mandate to the coalition of willing nations?"
SECURITY COUNCIL EXTENDS MANDATE OF UNITED NATIONS IRAQ MISSION FOR 12 MONTHS, UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTING RESOLUTION 1883, 7 August 2009
The Security Council, reiterating its support to the people and Government of Iraq in their efforts “to build a secure, stable, federal, united and democratic nation, based on the rule of law and respect for human rights”, today extended the mandate of the United Nations Mission in that country for another year.
Recognizing that the security of United Nations personnel was essential for UNAMI to carry out its work, the Council called on the Government of Iraq and other Member States to continue providing security and logistical support to the United Nations presence in the country.
The full text of resolution 1883 (2009) reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Reaffirming the independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Iraq,
“Welcoming improvements in the security situation in Iraq achieved through concerted political and security efforts...
“1. Decides to extend the mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) for a period of 12 months from the date of this resolution;
“3. Recognizes that security of United Nations personnel is essential for UNAMI to carry out its work for the benefit of the people of Iraq and calls upon the Government of Iraq and other Member States to continue to provide security and logistical support to the United Nations presence in Iraq;
“4. Welcomes the contributions of Member States in providing UNAMI with the financial, logistical, and security resources and support that it needs to fulfil its mission and calls upon Member States to continue to provide UNAMI with these resources and support;"
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546 was adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council at its 4987th meeting, on 8 June 2004.[1][2][3]
From April 2003 to the end of June 2004 Iraq had been governed by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA). The CPA's administrator had an appointed body of Iraqis, the Iraqi Governing Council, that served the CPA in an advisory capacity.
On 30 June 2004, the CPA was scheduled to dissolve and hand power over an Iraqi Interim Government, staffed by appointees chosen by foreigners.
Resolution 1546 endorsed the dissolution of the CPA and the handover to the appointees of the Iraqi Interim Government as a step in Iraq’s transition to a democratically elected government.
The resolution said that the UN was "looking forward" to the end of the occupation and the assumption of full responsibility and authority by a fully sovereign and independent Iraq.
It was superseded by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1637.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1637 was a resolution of the United Nations Security Council extending the mandate of the MNF-I authorized in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1546 until 31 December 2006.[1] It was submitted by Denmark, Japan, Romania, the United Kingdom and the United States.
It was superseded/amended/modified by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1723.
United Nations Security Council Resolution 1723, submitted by Denmark, Japan, Slovakia, the United Kingdom and the United States, was adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council on November 18, 2006, extending the mandate of multi-national forces in Iraq until December 2007, with a force review in June 2007.
The resolution was requested by the Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in a letter that was attached to the resolution as an annex, along with a letter from the United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice confirming the force's willingness to continue. The resolution allows for the mandate to be terminated earlier if requested by the Iraqi government.
This resolution follows on from the earlier resolutions providing for the multinational force, resolutions 1546 (which established the multi-national force in 2004) and 1637 (which extended the mandate in 2005).[1]
The full text of resolution 1883 (2009) reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions on Iraq, in particular 1500 (2003) of 14 August 2003, 1546 (2004) of 8 June 2004, 1557 (2004) of 12 August 2004, 1619 (2005) of 11 August 2005, 1700 (2006) of 10 August 2006, 1770 (2007) of 10 August 2007, and 1830 (2008) of 7 August 2008,
“Reaffirming the independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity of Iraq,
“Commending the important efforts made by the Government of Iraq to strengthen democracy and the rule of law, to improve security and public order and to combat terrorism ...
“Underscoring the sovereignty of the Government of Iraq...
“1. Decides to extend the mandate of the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI) for a period of 12 months from the date of this resolution;
“4. Welcomes the contributions of Member States in providing UNAMI with the financial, logistical, and security resources and support that it needs to fulfill its mission and calls upon Member States to continue to provide UNAMI with these resources and support; …”
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2009/sc9725.doc.htm
http://thecommentarybyamoros.blogspot.com/2013/05/a-speech-at-west-point-from-cafe.html
http://thecommentarybyamoros.blogspot.com/2013/05/obama-forcing-generation-to-grow-up.html
http://thecommentarybyamoros.blogspot.com/2013/05/iraq-one-of-great-achievements-of-this.html
No comments:
Post a Comment