VOL. XLVII
No 12
22
The Political Scene (22 March 2004)
Spain’s new prime minister elect has denounced the invasion and occupation of Iraq and said he will withdraw Spanish forces from Iraq unless the present coalition there is replaced by a UN-led force. In an otherwise embarrassing week for the Americans and their other European supporters, the UN has agreed to help out in choosing the interim government that is to take over in Iraq on 30 June. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is proceeding with his plans for a unilateral “separation” from the Palestinians.
Spain Opts Out
Whatever role the 11 March terrorist attacks in Madrid played in unseating Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar and his centrist Popular Party, the victory of the Socialist Party in Spain’s 14 March elections brought to power, in the person of prime minister elect Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, a man who had made it very clear well before the attacks that he shares the opposition of the vast majority of the Spanish electorate to the invasion and occupation of Iraq. And once elected, Mr Zapatero lost little time in reiterating his views in no uncertain terms, saying in a radio interview on 15 March that “the war in Iraq was a disaster, the occupation of Iraq is a disaster…Mr Bush and Mr Blair need to engage in some self-criticism. You can’t just go ahead and do things. You can’t bombard a people just in case. You can’t organize a war on the basis of lies” and announcing that “the Spanish troops in Iraq will come home” by 30 June unless the present coalition in Iraq is replaced by a UN-led multinational force. Just to make sure his message comes across, on 17 March he described that occupation of Iraq as “a fiasco” and reiterated that Spanish troops will be withdrawn, adding that “fighting terrorism with bombs and Tomahawk missiles is not a way to win, but will instead provoke more extremism. Terrorism is fought with the rule of law, international law, and with intelligence services.”
Ibrahimi To Return To Iraq
While the Spanish decision may not have much effect militarily – Spain is the sixth largest contributor to the “coalition of the willing,” with 1,300 troops in Iraq – there can be little doubt that Spain’s defection to “old Europe” was a painful political and diplomatic blow for the Americans and an embarrassment for other European supporters of the US. In Poland, Prime Minister Leszek Miller acknowledged on 15 March that the change in the Spanish position “means, quite obviously, serious complications for Poland.” Italian European Affairs Minister Rocco Buttiglione sounded very much like Mr Zapatero when he told the daily Il Messagero on 18 March that “the war may have been a mistake. Perhaps there were ways it could have been avoided. What is certain is that it was not the best thing to do. Terrorism cannot be defeated only by the force of arms, and if we give the impression that weapons play the dominant role, we will only stir up nationalist feelings among the Arabs against us.” On the same day, Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski said that his country had been “taken for a ride” in regard to Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. In Washington, President Bush put his own particular spin on the situation on 16 March when he told Dutch Prime Minister Jan-Peter Balkenende that Iraqis “don’t want people to withdraw because they want to be free…al-Qa’ida has an interest in Iraq for a reason. And that interest is they realize this is a front in the war on terror and they fear the spread of freedom and democracy in places like the greater Middle East.” Meanwhile White House spokesman Scott McClellan tried to put a brave face on Spain’s demand that the UN should take over by claiming that “we’ve always said that the UN has a vital role to play,” adding that “they have played a vital role in the past…we believe the UN has a vital role to play going forward.”
In point of fact, before the invasion of Iraq the Bush administration dismissed the UN as irrelevant, and it remains a fairly safe bet that what the Americans mean by “a vital role” is not what Mr Zapatero has in mind. Moreover on the Iraqi side of the equation there appears to be a certain amount of confusion as to what role, if any, the UN should play. UN special envoy Lakhdar Ibrahimi said in New York on 16 March that UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had received a written message from the Iraqi Shi'a leader, Ayatollah 'Ali al-Sistani, and that “he wants the UN to play a role – to continue to play a role – in Iraq,” adding that “we need a clear request from the parties in Iraq.” However, on the same day the director of Ayatollah Sistani’s office in Lebanon, Hamid al-Khaffaf, flatly contradicted Mr Ibrahimi, telling Reuters that “we affirm there was no letter sent from Ayatollah 'Ali al-Sistani to Mr Kofi Annan…regarding the return of the UN to Iraq.” Whatever the truth of the matter, Mr Annan confirmed on 18 March that he had been formally asked by both the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) and the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC)to help “build consensus among Iraqis on the powers, structure and composition of the interim government and the process for its establishment,” and that “I have therefore asked my special adviser Lakhdar Ibrahimi and his team, as well as the electoral assistance team, to return to Iraq as soon as possible.”
Sharon Calls Off Meeting With Qurai'
Following twin suicide attacks in the southern port of Ashdod on 14 March, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon postponed a scheduled meeting with his Palestinian counterpart, Ahmad Qurai', with an alacrity that suggested he was never very keen on the idea in the first place. And he followed this up by telling the Knesset on 15 March that “there is no leader on the Palestinian side with the courage and ability to fight terror. Soon it will become clear to the world that Israel has no genuine partner for peace on the Palestinian side. Therefore, also in the political arena, Israel will have to act according to its own discretion.” That discretion, of course, is a reference to Mr Sharon’s plans for a unilateral “separation” from the Palestinians involving an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza (and not much more), and on 17 March the UN for the first time offered to assist such a withdrawal. UN Middle East coordinator Terje Roed-Larsen told reporters in Cairo after talks with Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Mahir that “the quartet stands ready to assist and of course the Secretary General of the UN,” adding that “what we discussed today…is how Egypt and the UN and the quartet can push this project forward the right way. The important thing for all of us now is that the Israelis withdraw from Gaza.“ Mr Roed-Larsen also emphasized that the withdrawal should be in line with Security Council resolutions and the quartet’s “road map” and should be “coordinated” with the Palestinian Authority, but in that respect he is very likely to be disappointed, since Mr Sharon sees separation as an alternative to the road map – which he has never fancied - rather than part of it.
Charles Snow