* Questions presented by Iraq to the Security
Council
Baghdad 25, July 2002
Questions presented by Iraq's Foreign Minister to the UN Secretary
General in the session of talks on March 7, 2002 and demanded
the
Security Council answer on them.
1 - What is your vision and assessment to what we have reached
after
seven years and seven months of Iraq's
cooperation with the
Special Committee and the International
Agency of Atomic Energy?
How would this cooperation be used to
build on?
2 - If one or two of the Security Council permanent members say
that
they are not assured of disarmament,
we want to know what do
they want to be assured of? What do
they search for? What is the
necessary time to complete this? We
also ought to be satisfied,
not only the Security Council, in order
to go on cooperating
with it. If they have any doubt about
a certain site or activity,
we ought to know about it.
3 - How do you explain a stance of a permanent member in the
Security
Council which officially calls to invade
Iraq and impose an agent
regime on its people by force in a clear
violation of the Security
Council resolutions themselves which
clearly state to respect
Iraq's sovereignty, independence and
territorial integrity and
the rules of the international law and
the UN Charter. At the
same time, it demands Iraq implementing
the Security Council
resolutions.
4 - Is the Security Council seriously stick on its mandate and
the
resolutions which it issued, in particular
resolution 687 on
April 3, 1991, and the fair, legal reading
for this Resolution?
The Security Council is subject to the
US explanation of the
resolutions and to what it (the US)
is issuing of unilateral
resolutions concerning Iraq.
5 - How could normal relation between Iraq and the Security Council
be achieved under the current, declared
US policy, seeking to
invade Iraq and change by force the
patriotic political regime
in it?
6 - The United States continuously declares that the economic
sanctions imposed on Iraq will remain
as long as the patriotic
political regime in Iraq stays, what
is the Security Council
stance over this policy, which violates
the relevant Security
Council resolutions?
7 - What are the guarantees that the United Nations could offer
to
prevent interference between Iraq's
relation with the United
Nations and the political, aggressive
US goals?
8 - The concept of synchronization in implementing the reciprocal
obligations stated in the Security Council
resolutions related
to Iraq is necessary and essential to
rebuild confidence between
Iraq and the Security Council. What
are your speculations on
the obligations related to Iraq's rights,
foremost the lifting
of the sanctions, respect of Iraq's
sovereignty, independence
and territorial integrity and make the
Mid-East region free of
weapons of mass destruction. Those obligations,
the Security
Council ought to implement, to open
a new page of cooperation
between Iraq and the United Nations?
How could we set up a
mechanism that secures synchronizing
the implementation of two
sides' obligations?
9 - Security Council resolutions and not to demand the same from
a permanent member in the Security Council
which continues
violating those resolutions, especially
those related to
respecting Iraq's sovereignty, independence
and territorial
integrity, and officially vows that
its policy aims to invade
the Republic of Iraq and impose an agent
government on its
people?
10 - After disclosure of the spying activities of former UNSCOM
inspectors and the International Agency
of Atomic Energy
according to the confessions made by
some of the special
committee members and statements issued
by US sources and
some Security Council permanent members
and what was acknowledged
by the General Secretariat. Is it fair
that inspectors return
to Iraq who could be used to spy against
Iraq and its leadership
and to update information about Iraq's
vital economic
installations to bomb them in a coming
aggression?
11 - Could the United Nations secure that those coming to Iraq
are
not spies and will not commit spying
activities?
12 - Could the UN guarantee elimination of the two no-fly zones?
Could
the UN guarantee the upcoming inspection
would not be a prelude
for an aggression on Iraq as in 1998?
Could the UN guarantee that
the U.S. would not attack Iraq during
the inspecting operations
like wise along the seven years and
a half from may 1991 to
December 1998.
13 - What is the secretary general view about the time required
for
the inspection teams that could make
them sure that Iraq does
not have weapons of mass destruction
and inform the Security
Council on this fact? What are methods
of which the UN thinks
of using in this aspect and how far
its coincidence with related
international accords?
14 - How would inspectors of whom states are declaring the bids
officially to threaten Iraq's national
security and invade
it apply international unbiased mandate
on Iraq or respect
the Security Council resolutions and
their duties in virtue
of the charter? The presence of US and
British inspectors
at the special committee and international
agency for atomic
energy helped in collecting intelligence
data and specify
locations that were targeted in their
aggression. All location
which had been visited by the inspections
teams were exposed
in 1998 aggression including the presidential
sites despite
the inspectors have affirmed being clear
from weapons of mass
destruction. Besides, the American and
British have bombed all
the industrial sites according to inspectors'
data while they
were under continuous monitoring.
15 - What is the secretary general's view over structure of UNIMOVIC?
And is it plausible to approve some
individuals who had violated
their unbiased mandate and duties in
addition to reputation of
their organization (the UN) when they
acted espionage on Iraq?
16 - What is the mandate of UNIMOVIC? The UN statement and documents
released up to now are ambiguous? How
far is the authority of
its head? And what is the delegates'
committee authority?
What is the form of the secretary general
supervision on its
functioning. And what are the guarantees
that the committee
and its chief would not abuse their
authority? What are the
guarantees that this committee would
not violate Iraq's
sovereign rights?
17 - Dropping 120,000 tones of bombs, including 800 tones of depleted
uranium, on Iraq during 1991 aggression
and the aggressions that
followed, in addition to the all- out,
12-years blockade have
led to a semi- demolition of economic,
health, education and
service infrastructure. Iraq needs to
utilize all its resources
when sanctions are lifted to rebuild
its basic installations.
The question of compensations with their
high rate stands as
a big obstacle to this. What does the
secretary general see to
correct this situation? Does he intend
to send expert teams to
Iraq to discuss the question of rebuilding
and its costs and
prepare the requirements to urge the
Security Council to
reconsider the question of compensations?
18 - The blockade and the military aggressions launched by the
United
States and Britain against Iraq since
1991 have caused huge
material and human losses in Iraq. What
is the possibilities
of reconsidering, within the comprehensive
solution based
on justice, for compensating Iraq for
human material and
psychological damages and losses that
its people were suffering
from on the same base adopted by the
security council on
compensation?
19 - Iraq has a firm right of self-defense under article 15 of
the
charter, though the security council
had to abided with its
commitments and respecting Iraq's sovereignty
and territories
integrity which encouraging regional
and none- regional parties
to violate Iraq's national security.
How do you look at the
question of Iraq's right of self-defense
and the use of what
the international law and charter secures
it of the right to
possess the defense weapons?
http://www.uruklink.net/iraqnews/enews8.htm
Your
opinion |