The Center for Cooperative Research
U:     P:    
Not registered yet? Register here
 
Search
 
Advanced Search
Click here to join: Suggest changes to existing data, add new data to the website, or compile your own timeline. More Info >>


Main Menu
Home 
History Engine Sub-Menu
Projects 
Timelines 
Profiles 
Forum 
Miscellaneous Sub-Menu
Donate 
Links 
End of Main Menu

Submit a timeline entry
Donate: If you think this site is important, please help us out financially. We need your help!
Email updates
 


 

Profile: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq

 
  

Positions that Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq has held:


http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/archive/2002/usukgov102202.htm


 

Quotes

 
  

No quotes or excerpts for this entity.


 

Relations

 
  

No related entities for this entity.


 

Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq actively participated in the following events:

 
  

October 21, 2002      Complete Iraq timeline

       US Ambassador to the UN John Negroponte provides the five permanent members of the UN Security Council with a revision of the UN draft resolution. [Associated Press, 10/21/02; Telegraph, 10/22/02 Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq] The Bush administration makes it clear that it expects the UN Security Council to vote on this draft of the resolution soon and signals that US officials are losing their patience with other member states. At the daily White House press briefing, Secretary Ari Fleischer says, “It's coming down to the end. The United Nations does not have forever.” Similarly, State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher, states, “We're also making clear it is time to wrap this up.” [Associated Press, 10/21/02; Associated Press, 10/21/02b] George Bush will say the following day: “The UN can't make its mind up. If Saddam won't disarm, we will lead a coalition to disarm him for the sake of peace. [The United Nations] must resolve itself to be something more than the League of Nations, must resolve itself to be more than a debating society, must resolve itself to keep international peace.” Summing up US feelings, an unnamed official tells the New York Times that the administration's message to the other permanent members is, “You're either with us or against us.” [Telegraph, 10/22/02; New York Times, 10/23/02; CNN, 10/22/02]
The revision drops the words “all necessary means,” stipulating in its place that Iraq's failure to abide by the new resolution would result in “serious consequences.” [Associated Press, 10/21/02; Associated Press, 10/21/02b; Telegraph, 10/22/02; Washington Post, 10/22/02 Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq]
The revision does not require that UN inspectors be accompanied by armed guards, a requirement in the earlier draft which many current and former UN inspectors opposed. [Associated Press, 10/21/02; Associated Press, 10/21/02b Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq]
A provision in the previous draft requiring that member states help the UN enforce “no-fly” and “no-drive” zones around the inspection sites remains in the draft resolution, but in brackets, suggesting that the US and Britain are willing to negotiate on this point. [Associated Press, 10/21/02b; Telegraph, 10/22/02; Economist, 10/23/02 Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq]
The revision does not require that the five permanent members of the Security Council be permitted to appoint their own officials to the inspection teams. [Telegraph, 10/22/02; Associated Press, 10/21/02b Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq]
The revision stipulates that Iraq must declare its weapons of mass destruction within 30 days of the resolution's passing, after which the weapons inspectors would have another 45 days to commence its work on disarmament. If Iraq does not meet the deadline, its failure to do so will be considered a “material breach” of the resolution. [Economist, 10/23/02; ABC News, 10/23/02 Sources: John Negroponte]
The revised draft still contains phrases that set a hair trigger for the implementation of “serious consequences.” The revision stipulates that further “false statements and omissions” by Iraq would amount to “a further material breach.” [Economist, 10/23/02 Sources: Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq] In spite of the revision, the oppositional stances of France, Russia, Mexico, and China remain unchanged. Bulgaria, Colombia, Norway, Singapore show some support for the revision. [Telegraph, 10/22/02; Associated Press, 10/21/02b; Times, 10/28/02]
People and organizations involved: George W. Bush, Ari Fleischer, Revised Draft of a US-British UN Resolution on Iraq, Richard A. Boucher  Additional Info 
          


Except where otherwise noted, the textual content of each timeline is licensed under the Creative Commons License below:

Creative Commons License Home |  About this Site |  Development |  Donate |  Contact Us
Terms of Use