Peace Partners Schröder. Chirac in the Elysée Palace in Paris, January 22
The site exudes historical atmosphere, its location in the White House was carefully chosen. Washington's great wartime president Franklin Delano Roosevelt repeatedly laid out the seriousness of the situation to his countrymen in front of the fireplace of the windowless room next to the Oval Office, later named "the Roosevelt Room." His "fireside chats," approximately 30 in number, prepared the United States for the suffering and burdens that the nation would have to shoulder in the fight against the Axis powers.
Six decades later, at 4:30 p.m. local time last Thursday, a successor to FDR entered the historic room. George W. Bush was preparing Americans for a new armed encounter – a war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq.
Looking serious and using somber words, the 43rd President of the United States repeated point by point what his Secretary of State Colin Powell had presented to the Security Council of the United Nations the day before. After his accusatory speech, the top diplomat was now standing in the Roosevelt Room next to the President as the latter sketched in rough outline a picture of grim menace: Of Saddam Hussein, "this master of deceit" who had flagrantly opposed a dozen U.N. resolutions; who possessed weapons of mass destruction, and was hiding his arsenal from the U.N. weapons inspectors.
And — of special importance to the nation that still felt the profound effects of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 — that Iraq had for years had close ties with Al Qaeda forces of chief terrorist Osama Bin Laden. In Baghdad and Northern Iraq an Al Qaeda group led by the troublemaker Abu Mussab al Sarkawi was preparing new attacks all over the world.
The upshot of the President's address was short and clear: "The game is up," war is unavoidable.
No. The game is not quite up, not yet; there is a last chance. Perhaps peace in the Gulf can still be preserved with a last-minute diplomatic initiative. Of all things, the "Old Europe," as U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld so condescendingly referred to it on his brief visits to Rome and Munich over the weekend, is launching a last-minute diplomatic effort to achieve conciliation this week, with France and Germany as the main players. They can apparently count on the support of Russia and China in this risky venture, both of whom have veto power in the U.N. Security Council. Whether George W. Bush knew it or not at the time of his speech, since the beginning of the year top-level German and French officials, acting on behalf of their leaders, have been in secret conversations to develop an idea of their own: To install a system of disarmament in Iraq supervised by thousands of troops. Without a doubt, this would humiliate Saddam Hussein, but it is not intended to remove him, as Washington and London have planned.
Aerial photo of Iraqi "Chemical weapons depot: Tricks and deception
For first of all, and this is the new element of the plan, armed international peace-keeping troops would move into Iraq. These elite soldiers would be wearing the blue helmets of the United Nations, and it would be their task to provide military protection for the inspectors. In this way a kind of house to house search with the goal of destroying any finds of forbidden materials could take place throughout the entire country. The idea is that Saddam Hussein would have to watch as his country is disarmed for all the world to see — under European leadership and also with German participation. "If this concept of a strong disarmament regime prevails, then Germany will go along," according to a member of the government. The deployment of the Americans is part of this concept – as a backdrop threat. The 150,000 U.S. soldiers surrounding Iraq would remain in position, first to enforce the peaceful invasion by the blue-helmeted troops and then to protect them.
The plans of the French and the Germans are already recognizable in outline form:
All this should apply not just for a few weeks or months but perhaps for many years. If Saddam's regime were to "implode" one day because of such measures, it would "just be accepted" – but in contrast to the American hard-liners, this is not the primary goal of the exercise.
If the international community so decides, Project Mirage, can be either a path to peace or a path to war. For if Saddam Hussein refuses to allow U.N. troops to enter his country after the passage of a Security Council resolution, it would be clear that now it was the Americans' turn. The venture is also attractive when it comes to German domestic politics. It shows a chancellor who is able to act and who, even after his double defeat of two weekends ago, is not by any means dissolving in self-pity.
Under his leadership Germany would offer proof that the danger of isolation about which many warned (even his Foreign Minister did so in an undertone) can be averted. Anyone who cooks up a peace plan together with those who are in power in France can't be an outsider. The plan would definitely have a disciplinary effect within his own coalition. Especially on Joschka Fischer, who believes Gerhard Schröder's vociferous anti-war course narrows his political scope, and who would once again have to lower his expectations.
Perhaps the Opposition would have reason to sort itself out again. Up to now Party head Angela Merkel and her troops have been reproaching the chancellor for having removed himself "from the mainstream." That particular Friday morning the CDU party leader had a hard time imagining a third path between the advocates of war in the White House and Schröder's "no." She had certainly noted the offer by the French to send their surveillance planes into Iraq to reinforce the inspection system. Although she could not yet have known the background of these events, the alert CDU leader realized, "Something is becoming apparent."
Since early in the year Schröder's people had been tinkering with the details of their own proposals for the disarmament of Iraq. During a meeting of the Security Cabinet — the top leadership of the German government — they had quickly agreed: "It isn't enough now simply to say 'no'" as the chancellor immediately afterward told his foreign advisors.
Chief Inspectors Blix, Baradei: "Something is happening"
However, step by step possible partners abroad were being let in on the comcept: China, Russia, and Greece which is at present chairing the European Union – first reactions were positive. On Friday the Pope gave his visitor from Germany, Joschka Fischer, spiritual support. Schröder planned to discuss a rough outline of the plan with Vladimir Putin on the weekend. The Spanish, the British, and the Italians have so far been left out — to say nothing of the NATO partner in Washington. "You start in your own country," is what they're saying in the Chancellery. And that is just what José Maria Aznar, Tony Blair, and Silvio Berlusconi did when they formulated a "a letter of submission" to George W. Bush the week before last. For Schröder and Chirac every hour now counts in the efforts to prevent American military action. The German-French concept must be finalized before U.N. Chief Inspector Hans Blix presents his report next Friday. The text will be written in the next few days. Ultimately it should result in an independent draft for a U.N. resolution.
One phrase is particularly explosive. What will the international community do if Iraq does not submit to the intensive inspection regime that in practice would incapacitate it? It would mean war – and in all probability with German approval. For after the "serious consequences" that are already threatened in Resolution 1441 and which the text of the German-French resolution would in all probability also contain, there would be no way out. Germany and France would again become part of the international convoy.
However, if Saddam Hussein allows the blue helmets into his country and then prevents them from doing their work, it would finally present the international community and above all the Americans with what many Americans already perceive today: a clear and present danger. Without a reason for war that would be obvious to everyone — and the polls in Europe as well as continual resistance to war in America also show this — an armed encounter can hardly be legitimized. Schröder's condition, which is almost word for word the same as the French administration's declaration, could thus be realized: War would be the last resort, the community of nations having first tried everything to avoid it. German soldiers would still not participate in a war against Iraq, but a German vote of 'yes' for a military action would be unavoidable. In all probability the French would then also participate in effecting an Iraqi regime change.
France would presumably take overall control of the common initiative – and as a permanent member of the Security Council it would also introduce the draft of the resolution. In his speech last Wednesday in the Security Council, Chirac's foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, already indicated the direction France would take. "Why go to war if Resolution 1441 still allows us plenty of room to maneuver?" asked the career diplomat, a close confidant of the French president.
The Americans, too, could accept a robust disarmament regimen as a successful outcome. No disarmament without the U.S. threat in the background, and Americans might also be among the U.N. soldiers. Thus the French-German Plan might have a twofold purpose – it would be practical for Europeans and Americans alike. If the inspectors have really been deceived so far, Villepin pointed out after Powell's speech in the Security Council, they should now be given the opportunity to prevent such deceptions in the future. France, therefore, would continue to follow the third path: "In choosing between military intervention and an inspection regimen made ineffective by the lack of Iraqi cooperation, one has to decide whether to strengthen the means of inspection."
Powell grimly watched as German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer immediately and briskly concurred – as though he and Villepin had discussed concerted action beforehand. Several representatives in the Security Council suspected as much.
"Let's increase the number of inspectors twofold, even threefold," Villepin said emotionally, "let's open regional offices everywhere" in Iraq. In addition to inspectors the U.N. could send guards into Saddam Hussein's empire to secure Iraqi sites that have already been inspected or still need to be inspected. France is prepared to supply all available means – especially strategic reconnaissance planes of the "Mirage IV" class, which were previously deployed in Africa, in the Balkans and most recently over Afghanistan.
Powell pricked up his ears, for behind the scenario that Villepin was developing before the attentive circle of the 15 members of the Security Council a plan was emerging that would put new obstacles in the way of the Americans.
Foreign Minister Fischer, Pope John Paul II: exhortation to peace
Did Powell realize that the chief French diplomat was about to upset the plans of the Washington hawks, as was done once before in November with Resolution 1441? During lunch following the Security Council meeting he brusquely took Villepin to task: "How do you actually intend to handle the Iraq situation now?" The Frenchman began to make a long speech about the harmful consequences of wars in general and how they create more damage than they avoid. "I don't accept the idea that war always brings with it negative results," Powell replied and demanded, "Tell us what it is you want."
Villepin, refusing to be intimidated, countered that he had already done so: intensified inspections. Not necessary, Powell replied, and besides, the inspectors had not asked for that so far.
This exchange indicates that there will be another great struggle in the days ahead, probably the last one before the final decision. The proposal Villepin presented in New York had been shrewdly worked out down to the last detail with President Jacques Chirac. The two men trust each other completely because they are familiar with each other's thinking. As secretary-general at the Elysée during Chirac's first term in office from 1995 to 2002, Villepin served as top advisor, accomplice, and string-puller for the President.
After the Council meeting, Chirac launched a concentrated campaign of telephone diplomacy. He called Putin in Moscow, Jiang Zemin in Beijing, as well as the heads of state of Mexico, Chile, Syria, and Cameroon, all of whom are represented in the Security Council. "We refuse to view war as inevitable," he implored his potential partners-in-peace. The time had not yet arrived to consider a second resolution which, according to the American and British, would present an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein and could empower Bush to wage war.
The Security Council can dispatch a unit of blue-helmet soldiers on its own initiative. As with all the 55 missions the world organization has set up since its founding in 1945, the Security Council, which is composed of five permanent and ten rotating members, has to define the scope and duration of a mandate.
The debate about the implication and extent of intervention by armed U.N. soldiers, which in the past has often been protracted, could be much shorter this time. For the German-French suggestion follows a demand Washington first made during the eight-week long deliberations on Resolution 1441 before it was adopted last November. At the time, John Negroponte, the U.S. Ambassador, said UNMOVIC was supposed to move into Iraq with fully armed reinforcements in order to carry out the job of disarmament, by force of arms if necessary.
The idea found little acceptance — a sentiment shared by the Germans. And UNMOVIC head Hans Blix, the chief U.N. weapons inspector, certainly did not want to go to Mesopotamia as leader of a combat patrol.
The U.S. proposal of last Fall was ultimately based on suggestions put forward by Rolf Ekeus, the first leader of the precurser organization UNSCOM, which had searched Iraq for forbidden armament material from 1991 to 1998. An international force, stationed partly in neighboring countries and partly in Iraq itself, was to help the U.N. carry out its mandate. Weapons inspector Blix was authorized to ask for troops – without prior agreement by the Security Council. "The goal of such a provision is to force Iraq to abandon its notorious ways of circumventing the inspections and impeding them," Ekeus said.
In any case, it was important to maintain the pressure with armed forces until the inspections were completed, "otherwise Saddam Hussein would be back at his old game again." Last Friday Ekeus told the SPIEGEL, "The idea is still a good one." In the map exercise, originally 50,000 men were mentioned. This number was also seriously considered at the White House at least for a time. When the Americans first started to circulate a draft resolution in the Security Council in October last year, it still provided for the U.N. detectives to be protected by "sufficient U.N. security forces." Moreover, these units were to keep a watch on zones in which UNMOVIC had restricted Iraqi movements on the ground and in the air.
It was the military above all who voted against it. Men like the head of the American Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney, who derided the idea as "the mother of all games of chance." He and others were afraid that such a relatively small unit would be in constant danger of being attacked and overcome by Saddam's guards.
Gaffney even prophesied a "Black Hawk Down" scenario, like the one in Somalia. Back then, 18 American commandos were killed by guerrillas. The videotaped scenes of the desecrated body of a GI led finally to the super power's ignominious retreat from the Horn of Africa.
Generals Fahd al-Amir, Franks: Deployment in Kuwait
Any obstruction or violent sabotage of this disarmament action would have as its consequence a direct and immediate military reprisal. And it would be supported not only by the power politics of a single super power, but by the U.N.'s right to use force as stipulated in Article VII of its Charter.
But above all, what would then happen to the Iraqis in their confrontation with the rest of the world would be up to them. Under the protection of a U.N. military force a profound change might suddenly again be possible in the political conditions of the land between the two rivers — one of the alleged goals of George W. Bush and his British fellow missionary Tony Blair.
The risky and immensely costly "nation building" project that Washington has apparently written into the marching orders of its invasion troops — up to 250,000 men — would now also become superfluous. The grandiose radical change that the Pentagon and State Department had in mind for the entire region is to begin after that: From the shores of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers a wave of liberation, democratization, and prosperity is supposed to wash over the Middle East and heal all the ills under which the peoples there are suffering today.
As in Germany and Japan in 1945, the U.S. military would first take over power in Baghdad. The Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Central Command, Tommy Franks, is to become the governor-general. One of his main tasks would be financing the reconstruction of Iraq from its huge oil deposits. The Pentagon estimates that an occupation army of at least 75,000 soldiers would be necessary to guarantee peace and stability in the region, which is larger than Germany. In the opinion of many experts this would be the minimum number, considering the danger of bloody conflicts breaking out at any time between hostile ethnic groups, religious factions, and vengeful tribal clans. It would hardly be possible for such a meager military force to hold in check the Kurds demanding secession in the North, and the Shiite majority in the South brutally repressed for decades.
One thing is certain, the occupiers would have to stay in the country for years to come. Britain's Defense Minister Geoff Hoon described as "mere rumor" plans that call for the British expeditionary corps now numbering about 40,000 to remain at least three years in the Middle East – but he hasn't officially denied it.
In Washington scenarios calling for the occupation to last for as long as ten years or more are making the rounds. Militant Islamists would provide just the right targets for thousands of armed unbelievers in a country located in a region once sanctified by the feet of the Prophet Mohammed himself.
Powell didn't mention any of that when the President of the Security Council, Berlin's Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, presiding over the session last Wednesday, asked him to take the floor. The retired general spoke for almost 90 minutes. He played tapes of raspy snippets of telephone conversations, flickering videos, and showed top secret satellite photos. He quoted from super-confidential CIA dossiers and projected frightening diagrams on a screen. In Powell's words this was "incontrovertible and undeniable" documentation of the tricks and deceits with which the despot of Baghdad had committed "grave violations" of the urgent requirements of Disarmament Resolution 1441. Therefore the "serious consequences" which had just been threatened by the U.S.: War – virtually inevitable.
By showing aerial photos Powell wanted to prove that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction and was developing rockets with a reach of 1200 kilometers – eight times farther than permitted in the armistice agreement of 1991. Taped telephone conversations of Iraqi military officers were supposed to prove that Baghdad was hiding large quantities of forbidden weapons.
Up to now Washington has seldom presented material gathered by the NSA's eavesdropping giant — once in 1983, in an effort to prove that the Soviets had intentionally shot down a South Korean jumbo jet; and again in 1986 to reveal that Libya's head of state Muammar al-Qaddafi was behind the bombing of the Berlin discoteque "La Belle."
Just as Powell brought CIA head George Tenet with him, so Foreign Minister Fischer also brought a Secret Service man along to the meeting room of the Security Council — the chief expert on weapons of mass destruction in the German Federal Information Service (BND). If Powell had presented any surprising evidence, a task force in the Berlin Foreign Office was ready to immediately evaluate the information and transmit the results to Fischer's BND associate.
But Powell's "proofs" were not that surprising after all, at least not to the experts. It certainly is politically explosive that Saddam is still tricking and deceiving, but that was already well known. More exciting was the tape of the telephone call, which suggests that explosive material was being removed from the arms factory al-Kindi near Mosul before the inspectors arrived. Iraq used to build ballistic rockets in the giant complex, originally constructed mainly by German firms.
For the BND and many other secret services the American reasoning that Iraq had sought solidarity with Bin Laden's Al Qaeda seemed unconvincing. The fact that alleged Al Qaeda activist, Abu Mussab al-Sarkawi has been in Northern Iraq for months and was treated for abdominal and leg injuries in a Baghdad hospital is largely undisputed by security experts. Mullah Krekar, head of the Islamic rebel group Ansar-e Islam (Supporter of Islam) which operates in Northern Iraq, mockingly rejects the suspicion that Al Qaeda has ties to Saddam Hussein (see Interview page 105). Even some American secret service experts say it is possible that the evidence Powell offered is based more on hypothesis than on hard facts. It was from the New York Times that the Germans and most other allied powers (with the exception of the British) found out something Powell had not mentioned in the Security Council: The Americans have allegedly captured Sarkawi's deputy. Apparently the claim that Sarkawi's followers were frolicking undisturbed in Baghdad originated in statements made by him. If this is true, it gives rise to a new situation for the evaluation of terrorist activities in Iraq.
Powell's appearance was not without consequences. Ten East European states reported to their new leader for duty. These young post-Communist democracies, some of which had escaped the clutches of totalitarian subordination only a few years before, were now advocating a violent overthrow in Iraq. In addition to European Union aspirants Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, and Romania — Albania, Croatia, and Macedonia also demonstrated with their signatures the deep gulf that divides Europe at present. The hard core of opponents to war also shrank in NATO after Luxembourg stealthily crossed over to the American side. There were now only a trio — Belgium, Germany, and France — to once more prevent the alliance from concerning itself with plans to support its ally Turkey which would perhaps be endangered by the threatening war.
In the middle of last week Ankara, which up to then had been hesitating, took a dramatic step in another direction. By parliamentary resolution it permitted American engineers to inspect and prepare port installations and airports through which the Pentagon wants to send tens of thousands of soldiers into Northern Iraq. It is now almost certain that a northern front will be opened in Iraq, even though the chairman of the Turkish ruling party AKP, Tayyip Erdogan claimed, "I still hope for a peaceful solution." (See interview page 108.) The threatened U.S. deployment in the Gulf continues unabated: At least 150,000 U.S. soldiers are to be in position on the borders of Iraq by the beginning of March; 500 U.S. Air Force planes are waiting for the order to take off. Two groups of airplane carriers each with up to a dozen escort ships will complement the three floating air bases which are already cruising the waters in the crisis region. Under pressure of the threat of impending war Chief Inspector Blix has changed course. The Swede had always refused to have experienced inspectors from the first U.N. mission take part in the present inspections. Blix had insisted on a policy of using "new faces," so as not to provoke Baghdad. Since Monday several of the former inspectors are again sitting in the UNMOVIC headquarters in New York, sifting through the results of the inspections. Blix wants to use their expertise in preparing his possibly decisive report on Friday. During the lightning visit that Blix paid to Baghdad with the Director of the International Atomic Energy Authority in Vienna, Mohammed al Baradei, the UNMOVIC people wanted to wrest concessions from Saddam Hussein that could perhaps still avert an armed conflict.
"Something is happening," the Swede exulted on his arrival. First, on Thursday an Iraqi scientist had given a two-hour account to the inspectors without a government 'minder' present. Further conversations were predicted. A rapprochement also seemed to be at hand in the matter of the U2 spy plane overflights.
The new flexibility showed only that Baghdad had also recognized that the Blix report on Friday could pronounce a verdict for war or peace in the land of the two rivers. If Blix again certifies that the Iraqis have not cooperated sufficiently, the troops will march. In any case Bush appeared confident when he announced in the Roosevelt Room that he could get a war resolution — his diplomats are already putting the finishing touches on it — through the Security Council.
The French-German peace initiative, Operation Mirage, could bring this scenario into disarray and torpedo Washington's war plans. In any event, that is what the "Old Europeans" hope will happen. However, one high-ranking U.N. diplomat fears "the Americans probably won't let anything stop them any more."
Ralf Beste, Olaf Ihlau, Siegesmund von Ilsemann, Romain Leick, Georg Mascolo, Gabor Steingart
© DER SPIEGEL 7/2003
All Rights Reserved
Reproduction only allowed with the permission of SPIEGELnet GmbH
