HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK ---------------------------
http://www.vaildaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Site=VD&Date=20030312&Category=NEWS&ArtNo=303120101&Ref=AR Vail Daily (Colorado) March 12, 2003 General: Still time for a NATO alliance Randy Wyrick The former Supreme Allied Commander for Europe says there's still time to bring reluctant nations into line with a U.N. resolution on Iraq. -"It's a little late to say we made a mistake, that Saddam isn't that big of a problem, that he's not a threat to the security of this nation and others, and we'll let him stay. That's dreamworks," says Clark. "Saddam cannot be allowed a victory, and anything that allows him to stay in power is a victory." -"There are many ways to form international coalitions," Fleischer told the New York Times. "The United Nations Security Council is but one of them." -"Of course you can trust your government," says Clark. "The government isn't going to tell you everything it knows; the government doesn't know everything it knows." "The diplomatic struggle appears to be winding down," says retired U.S. Army Gen. Wesley K. Clark. "But there's still time. The diplomatic process is not over, yet." Clark, in Vail Tuesday to address a group of American Express executives, says while France, Germany and Russia appear to have their heels dug in against armed conflict with Iraq, there's still time to get those nations, and others, to support a U.N. resolution to disarm the Middle Eastern country and remove Saddam Hussein from power. Still, Clark says, there's no urgency to attack Iraq this second. "It could be a week, two weeks or a month," he says. "It really doesn't matter." Clark, who appears regularly on television as a national security analyst for CNN, says the objective of the mission, to disarm Iraq, will be met. With hundreds of thousands of troops committed to the region, the theoretical line in the sand has been crossed. "It's a little late to say we made a mistake, that Saddam isn't that big of a problem, that he's not a threat to the security of this nation and others, and we'll let him stay. That's dreamworks," says Clark. "Saddam cannot be allowed a victory, and anything that allows him to stay in power is a victory." After the battle What happens after a military conflict with Iraq is as important as the conflict itself, Clark says, just as it was in the Kosovo campaign he helped coordinate. After helping forge a NATO military campaign to oust Slobodan Milosevic - the first military action in NATO's 50-year history - Clark and others watched Kosovo fall into disarray as the NATO alliance collapsed. Clark says he lays blame for the region's current mess squarely at the feet of the French, who refused to cooperate with NATO's post-war efforts in Kosovo and created a Serb enclave - a trouble spot to this day. "The U.S. didn't step up to the bar like it needed to, and the prospect of U.S. leadership is irreplaceable," Clark says. Clark echoes the sentiments of White House spokesman Ari Fleischer, who accused the U.N. Security Council of remaining impotent during the 1990s as ethnic slaughters raged in the Balkans, as well as Rwanda. "There are many ways to form international coalitions," Fleischer told the New York Times. "The United Nations Security Council is but one of them." Nations that fail to support the U.S.-led effort to disarm Iraq could find themselves left out of what President Bush has often called the "coalition of the willing," which could oust Hussein and oversee post-war Iraq. "You judge legitimacy by whether the United Nations Security Council acted," Fleischer said. "Once Saddam Hussein is overthrown, the people of Iraq will know who to thank." Lessons should apply Clark refers to a Washington Monthly article he wrote in which he says the lessons from Kosovo should be applied to Iraq and the War on Terrorism. He says the Kosovo campaign suggests alternatives in waging and winning the struggle against terrorism, hinging on "greater reliance in diplomacy and less on the military along." "We should have helped the United Nations create an International Criminal Tribunal on International Terrorism," says Clark. "We could have taken advantage of the outpourings of shock, grief and sympathy to forge a legal definition of terrorism and obtain an indictment of Osama bin Laden and the Taliban as war criminals charged with crimes against humanity." Such a move would have created greater legitimacy and won stronger support in the Islamic world, Clark says, and that legitimacy could have been used to raise pressure on Saudi Arabia and other Arab states to cut off support for terrorism and to strengthen the international coalition against Saddam Hussein. A question of trust Clark says the American public can trust what its government is saying about Iraq - despite some cries to the contrary. "Of course you can trust your government," says Clark. "The government isn't going to tell you everything it knows; the government doesn't know everything it knows." Lessons stemming from that lack of communication in Vietnam, as well as the Gulf War 12 years ago, are not complicated, Clark says. "The government must have candid, balanced communication with the American people," says Clark. "If the government says something, some people are going to doubt it. That's a healthy part of the equation." __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - establish your business online http://webhosting.yahoo.com --------------------------- ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.bdn7KI.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^================================================================
