Iraq stands accused of grave violations of international law following yesterday's unanimous adoption by the United Nations Security Council of Resolution 1441 demanding that it disarm its weapons of mass destruction. Unanimous action by the Council represents the highest form of legal sanction available in the international arena.
The resolution must therefore be taken with the utmost seriousness both by the Saddam Hussein regime and UN member-states. Unless it is adhered to, there is a grave risk of war in the Middle East, with potentially dangerous consequences for the region and the world economy.
The UN decision justifies the prolonged weeks of diplomacy necessary to reach this agreed outcome. The starting point was anything but propitious. Through the summer there was increasing international alarm and disquiet about the United States' plans to invade Iraq and change its regime in cooperation with willing allies and without reference to the Security Council. Those of President Bush's advisors who advocated this course have been bypassed by the Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell, working systematically with other permanent members of the Security Council. As a result the resolution adopted yesterday affirms US willingness to reach a negotiated outcome. The efforts of France, Britain, Russia, Ireland and other Security Council members have paid off in reaching a unanimity which affirms the UN's central role in this crisis.
The next stages will see the arms inspectors deployed with a very clear mandate to seek out and destroy such weapons. If the Iraqis fail to comply they face the probability of military action. The resolution provides for the Security Council to meet again to consider the situation if there is such a failure. It remains ambiguous whether military action by the US or other powers could be vetoed at that stage and President Bush has made it clear he is willing to go it alone or with allies if necessary. All depends on whether and how the Iraqis cooperate. The UN mandate is for disarmament, not regime change. There is sufficient conviction among the majority of Security Council members about the dangers of war, and sufficient success in insisting on the need to avoid it, to allow room for hope that it can be avoided in coming months, despite much talk about its inevitability.
The maximalist plans associated with hawks in Mr Bush's administration include regime change and occupation of Iraq, along with ambitious plans to seize its oil. No agreement to such plans is contained in yesterday's unanimous resolution, however much contingency planning may have gone into its preparations among the large powers with permanent seats on the Security Council. Ireland remains a member until the end of the year and has played an important role in insisting on maintaining the Council's authority and legitimacy. That will need continuing vigilance.