Two Options for the Rais
by Bruno Vespa

SOURCE: Italian Foreign Ministry

February 13, 2003

Peaceful disarmament and exile: the Minister of Foreign Affairs reveals the Government's moves in the match with Baghdad. From contacts with the United States and Great Britain to exchanges with Libya, Tunisia and Algeria to find a country willing to admit the dictator.

'Italy is doing its utmost to convince the United States to wait for the second resolution of the UN Security Council. Should the inspectors' second report state that Iraqi cooperation is still insufficient, we are sparing no effort to keep the permanent members of the Security Council from using their right of veto.

Franco Frattini rejects the charges coming from the opposition and the anti-war movement that the Italian Government has acquiesced to the United States. 'Our role is quite clearly only political since we are not members of the Security Council. Nevertheless, both the United States and Great Britain have pressed for our mediation, especially with Russia. Our goal is and remains peaceful disarmament.'

The Prime Minister asked Muammar Ghedafi to try and convince Saddam Hussein to leave Iraq. 'Given our excellent relations with the Maghreb, we have also contacted Tunisia and Algeria. But to anyone who asks us whether Saddam is willing to go into exile, we respond that the only answer that counts is still missing.

'The Iraqi crisis is also producing the worst crisis in NATO in recent history. We find that cause for concern, even if I am convinced that ultimately, Secretary General George Robertson's call to rebuild the unity of the alliance will be answered. We are working hard in this sense as well: a question of this kind cannot be left unanswered for too long, but it would be a mistake to isolate Germany and France. We have to convince them that here we are not talking about the winds of war in Iraq but of the defence of key country like Turkey.'

There are objections that a possible unilateral attack against Iraq by the United States could be launched from Turkey. One reaction would be Iraq's reprisal against Turkey.

When the NATO Summit in Prague last November agreed that Iraq should be pressured to disarm, all the Member States countries agreed on the need to guarantee protection and defence to any NATO member that became a potential objective.

Even then, some spoke of the makeup of the Alliance.

That is true, but it is no accident that NATO's range of action expanded at the very moment we decided that the European Union's defence system would substitute NATO in some areas of its field of operations in the Balkans, such as Macedonia.

So there has been an evolution.

There was an evolution in November, confirmed in December in the meeting of the Atlantic Council that reminded all the Member States of the need for absolute respect for the principle of mutual defence.

Why did the Government have the feeling that Romano Prodi, commenting on the position of France and Germany, was interfering in Italian domestic politics?

Quite frankly, I wasn't of that opinion. I wondered, with a sort of institutional curiosity, why the President of the Commission, who has no institutional authority, knows the factors of a French-Germany plan that France and Germany deny having and of which other countries are unaware, beginning with Greece, which holds the EU Presidency for the first half of 2003.

Still, Prodi's spokesperson confirmed that the President knows

Then astonishment is added to my institutional curiosity. Nevertheless, I would never have allowed myself to argue that Prodi intends to interfere in Italian politics.

Whether or not this plan exists, the press is discussing it.

Then let's look at what they're writing. The plan ostensibly calls for a larger number of UN inspectors, to create a sort of UN authority in Iraq and use spy plans, the French Mirage, to surveillance of Iraq.

Let's admit for a minute that that is exactly what the French-German plan entails.

First, Hans Blix, head of the inspection team, has stated that increasing the number of men working with him is useless. The problem does not lie with the number of inspectors; it depends on whether or not Saddam actively cooperates. It makes no difference whether you have 50 or 50 thousand people when you're searching for a needle in a haystack.

And what about the idea of a UN authority operating in Iraq?

Has the Iraqi Government decided to open their doors to a UN protectorate? Has anyone asked for Saddam's signature on this? Can we surmise that the United Nations might use force if he objects? Still, the problem is that the plan doesn't exist. It is wrong to make public opinion believe that there are options of foreign or military policy that actually have no basis. In Germany, the weekly Der Spiegel conjectures that the Chancellor keep his Foreign Ministers in the dark regarding some issues. And in Italy, the Left…

The Left?

They asked for a Parliamentary debate and a vote in the French-German plan that none of us have seen. That example alone is enough to demonstrate the consequences of artificially created news. Given the circumstances, how could we go before the Chamber of Deputies?

Is it true that the United States is edgy because they fear that time is being wasted?

February 14 will be the decisive day. The UN inspectors will present their new report. If they radically change their minds with respect to their previous report, claiming that Saddam has started supplying concrete proof that he is disarming, we start a new phase.

And if there's nothing new to report?

If, as many believe, the inspectors confirm Saddam Hussein's lack of cooperation, the next step would be a second UN resolution taking into account his concrete, flagrant violation of Resolution 1441 and lead to the famous 'serious consequences' already set forth.

In that case, some of the permanent members of the Security Council could use their right of veto against the war.

I trust that, as has happened until now, should the inspectors' report deserve the confidence of the Security Council, those countries with the right of veto that have not declared themselves until now (France, Russia and China) would abstain. A rupture in the Security Council would be dramatic. Saddam Hussein has been systematically violating United Nations resolutions for 12 years. If we have been willing to believe the inspectors until now, why should we suddenly start to doubt them? Silvio Berlusconi's strong hope is that, whatever happens, it will be possible to avoid a rupture that would send the world a terrible signal. And that is why the Greek Presidency convened a summit in Brussels on Monday the 17th, and why I am convinced that, polemics aside, France and Germany will not remain isolated.

If the second UN resolution is not obeyed, the Italian Parliament should take a vote on our country's position.

We will fight to the end for a peaceful solution to the dispute. No matter what, if things go beyond that, Berlusconi has told Bush and Colin Powell that in our country, the Parliament has a decisive role and must vote on the issue. They are aware of that. I hope that, if something irreparable happens at the UN, it will be possible to put together a larger majority than the one currently supporting the Government.

Is it true that, in any case, Italy would not send soldiers to war?

We already have 10 thousand soldiers involved in missions throughout the world and we are not a power that can allow ourselves a broader commitment. But we would guarantee logistic support and support for the operations of peacekeeping, reconstruction and humanitarian aid that would be needed after a conflict. We are already an international model for what we have done and are doing, from Kosovo to Afghanistan.

Reading the papers, it seems that Italy and Germany hold very divergent positions. But in the case of a conflict, both countries would apparently support military action by making air bases available to the Americans.

I have a personal relationship of great esteem and friendship for Germany Minister of Foreign Affairs Joschka Fischer. It is a given fact that Germany will authorise use of its bases and air space for American planes. Actually, there is a permanent authorisation that allows US planes to take off, land and refuel at the German base of Ramstein. It is a paradox that the Italian left accuses us of being vassals of Bush and points to Germany as a model, when we know that we will do exactly what Germany is doing now in the case of a conflict.

Have you noticed any discomfort over the fact that Saddam Hussein's weapons were largely supplied by the West?

I was personally not involved in that period, and we have to remember that the sins of the fathers are not visited on the sons. But episodes such as those you mention cannot in any way justify considering Saddam a victim today. Remember, the Left once demonstrated against someone considered one of the world's most savage dictators. We should try to avoid using events from the past to justify the present.