The British have been pushing this second resolution relentlessly, which the American’s don’t seemed to be bothered about, and now Spain wants to withdraw it as well.
Spain: Iraq Resolution May Be Withdrawn
The U.S.-backed resolution on Iraq may be withdrawn because of France’s threat to veto it, the Spanish foreign minister said Wednesday. The resolution is being co-sponsored by the United States, Britain and Spain and would set a deadline for Iraq to prove it has destroyed its weapons of mass destruction. France, Russia and China have said they will oppose any resolution endorsing war against Iraq. The United States says it wants a vote this week. Foreign Minister Ana Palacio said that if there is a vote, she expects it by Friday at the latest, but there might not be one. “Clearly, not putting it to a vote is a possibility which is being considered,” Palacio said.
“We are considering it, above all in view of the already absolute and emphatic affirmation by France of a veto, because a veto is undoubtedly something which has consequences for the United Nations system,” she said. Palacio spoke to reporters at the Spanish senate after returning from Paris and meetings with her French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin and other government officials. A Foreign Ministry official later downplayed Palacio’s remarks, saying she was talking about a hypothetical situation, and declined to say what kind of disarmament deadline Saddam Hussein might get if no resolution is voted on. Britain set out a list of conditions for Iraq’s disarmament Wednesday, hoping to break the impasse at the United Nations, but the British ideas have not yet been incorporated into a revised U.N. resolution. Palacio said Spain is willing to extend the disarmament deadline by a “a few days” but no more. Palacio said the resolution might be withdrawn even if it garnered the nine votes necessary for passage by the 15-member U.N. Security Council. Before her meeting in Paris, Palacio said Spain is open to changes to the resolution on Iraq, but the measure must ensure the “total disarmament” of Saddam.
Interesting move on Spain's part.
Her emphasis that this would have consequences on the United Nations - We are considering it, above all in view of the already absolute and emphatic affirmation by France of a veto, because a veto is undoubtedly something which has **consequences for the United Nations system** - i think suggests to me that Spain is worried about the credibility of the UN if this second Resolution is tabled. They feel certain that France or Germany will veto it, and then these three 'rogue' states (i mean, the UK, US, and Spain) would have to invade Iraq without UNSC sanction by claiming a so-called "moral majority". Of course, they will also be likely to argue that they can always fall back on 1441, (incidentally, anyone who reads that Resolution will find there is no such justification offered).
...Palacio said Spain is open to changes to the resolution on Iraq...
Good to hear. At least Spain has not shut itself off entirely from alternative routes.
“an American war campaign without the legal support of the United Nations would do enormous damage to the authority of the United Nations, the NATO alliance and relations between Europe and the United States”
European Union in New Warning on Bush Go-It-Alone War](http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/12/international/europe/12CND-PATT.html?ex=1048136400&en=70795ae15bbc923d&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE) New York Times
PARIS, March 12 — In another call for the Bush administration to slow its march toward war, the foreign relations head of the European Union warned today that Europe might withhold money for the reconstruction of Iraq if the United States waged war without the approval of the Security Council.
“It will be that much more difficult for the E.U. to cooperate fully and on a large scale — also in the longer-term reconstruction process — if events unfold without proper U.N. cover and if the member states remain divided,” said Chris Patten, the European Union’s External Relations Commissioner. Speaking during a debate in the European Parliament in Strasbourg, the British official added that an American war campaign without the legal support of the United Nations would do enormous damage to the authority of the United Nations, the NATO alliance and relations between Europe and the United States.
The specter of war has caused a deep and bitter split in the 15-country European Union — the world’s biggest aid donor — with Britain and Spain embracing the American call to war and France and Germany calling for continued international weapons inspections under United Nations auspices. The heads of state of the European Union will meet for a regularly scheduled meeting in Brussels next week and Iraq is expected to dominate the agenda.
“In the past I have sometimes been accused of issuing a threat of E.U. noncooperation if the United States chooses to proceed with U.N. backing,” he said. “That is not my point,” he said. “I am making, rather, a simple observation of fact: that if it comes to war, it will be very much easier” to make a case for generosity “if there is no dispute about the legitimacy of the military action that has taken place.”
Mr. Patten noted that the European Union’s budget is already “heavily committed,” adding, “It is of the greatest importance that if a war is waged in Iraq, the U.N. should authorize the decision to attack.” Mr. Patten made his remarks during a debate in the European Parliament in which deputies expressed their overwhelming opposition to a war waged only by the Untied States.
Now it seems the UK is also abandoning the idea of a second resolution, and is moving towards joining the US in a unilateral (and illegal) action against Iraq.
War in Iraq appears closer after the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, indicated that a new UN resolution was now “less likely than at any time”.](BBC NEWS | Middle East | Iraq war 'closer,' UK warns)