-Caveat Lector-

If you want to know how George W Bush will go about getting international support for 
war,
look at how his father did it 12 years ago. : John Pilger :19 Sep 2002



The making of a United Nations fig leaf, designed to cover an Anglo-American attack on
Iraq, has a revealing past. In 1990, a version of George W Bush's mafia diplomacy was
conducted by his father, then president. The aim was to "contain" America's former
regional favourite, Saddam Hussein, whose invasion of Kuwait ended his usefulness to
Washington.

Forgotten facts tell us how George Bush Sr's war plans gained the "legitimacy" of a 
United
Nations resolution, as well as a "coalition" of Arab governments. Like his son's 
undisguised
threats to the General Assembly, Bush challenged the United Nations to "live up to its
responsibilities" and condone an all-out assault on Iraq. On 29 October 1990, James 
Baker,
the secretary of state, declared: "After a long period of stagnation, the United 
Nations is
becoming a more effective organisation."

Just as Colin Powell, the present secretary of state, is busily doing today, Baker met 
the
foreign minister of each of the 14 member countries of the UN Security Council and
persuaded the majority to vote for an "attack resolution" - 678 - which had no basis 
in the
UN Charter.

It was one of the most shameful chapters in the history of the United Nations, and is 
about
to be repeated. For the first time, the full UN Security Council capitulated to an 
American-
led war party and abandoned its legal responsibility to advance peaceful and diplomatic
solutions. On 29 November, the United States got its war resolution. This was made
possible by a campaign of bribery, blackmail and threats, of which a repetition is 
currently
under way, especially in countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia. In 1990, Egypt was 
the
most indebted country in Africa. Baker bribed President Mubarak with $14bn in "debt
forgiveness" and all opposition to the attack on Iraq faded away. Syria's bribe was
different; Washington gave President Hafez al-Assad the green light to wipe out all
opposition to Syria's rule in Lebanon. To help him achieve this, a billion dollars' 
worth of
arms was made available through a variety of back doors, mostly Gulf states.

Iran was bribed with an American promise to drop its opposition to a series of World 
Bank
loans. The bank approved the first loan of $250m on the day before the ground attack on
Iraq. Bribing the Soviet Union was especially urgent, as Moscow was close to pulling 
off a
deal that would allow Saddam to extricate himself from Kuwait peacefully. However, with
its wrecked economy, the Soviet Union was easy prey for a bribe. President Bush sent 
the
Saudi foreign minister to Moscow to offer a billion-dollar bribe before the Russian 
winter
set in. He succeeded. Once Gorbachev had agreed to the war resolution, another $3bn
materialised from other Gulf states.

The votes of the non-permanent members of the Security Council were crucial. Zaire was
offered undisclosed "debt forgiveness" and military equipment in return for silencing 
the
Security Council when the attack was under way. Occupying the rotating presidency of 
the
council, Zaire refused requests from Cuba, Yemen and India to convene an emergency
meeting of the council, even though it had no authority to refuse them under the UN
Charter.

Only Cuba and Yemen held out. Minutes after Yemen voted against the resolution to 
attack
Iraq, a senior American diplomat told the Yemeni ambassador: "That was the most
expensive 'no' vote you ever cast." Within three days, a US aid programme of $70m to 
one
of the world's poorest countries was stopped. Yemen suddenly had problems with the
World Bank and the IMF; and 800,000 Yemeni workers were expelled from Saudi Arabia.
The ferocity of the American-led attack far exceeded the mandate of Security Council
Resolution 678, which did not allow for the destruction of Iraq's infrastructure and
economy. When the United States sought another resolution to blockade Iraq, two new
members of the Security Council were duly coerced. Ecuador was warned by the US
ambassador in Quito about the "devastating economic consequences" of a No vote.
Zimbabwe was threatened with new IMF conditions for its debt.

The punishment of impoverished countries that opposed the attack was severe. Sudan, in
the grip of a famine, was denied a shipment of food aid. None of this was reported at 
the
time. By now, news organisations had one objective: to secure a place close to the US
command in Saudi Arabia. At the same time, Amnesty International published a searing
account of torture, detention and arbitrary arrest by the Saudi regime. Twenty thousand
Yemenis were being deported every day and as many as 800 had been tortured and ill-
treated.

Neither the BBC nor ITN reported a word about this. "It is common knowledge in
television," wrote Peter Lennon in the Guardian, "that fear of not being granted visas 
was
the only consideration in withholding coverage of that embarrassing story." When the 
attack
was over, the full cost was summarised in a report published by the Medical Education
Trust in London. More than 200,000 people were killed or had died during and in the
months after the attack. This also was not news. Neither was a report that child 
mortality in
Iraq had multiplied as the effects of the economic embargo intensified. Extrapolating 
from
all the statistics of Iraq's suffering, the American researchers John Mueller and Karl 
Mueller
have since concluded that the subsequent economic punishment of the Iraqis has 
"probably
taken the lives of more people in Iraq than have been killed by all weapons of mass
destruction in history".

Today, the media's war drums are beating to the rhythm of Bush's totally manufactured
crisis, which, if allowed to proceed, will kill untold numbers of innocent people.

Little has changed, and humanity deserves better.

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to