US embassy cable - 03OTTAWA709

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000709 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR WHA/CAN, WHA/PDA 
WHITE HOUSE PASS NSC/WEUROPE, NSC/WHA 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: KPAO, KMDR, OIIP, OPRC, CA, TFUS01, TFUS02, TFUS03 
SUBJECT:  MEDIA REACTION: IRAQ; SERBIA 
 
 
IRAQ 
1.   "Diplomacy's last days" 
The conservative National Post opined (3/14): 
"...Barring some blockbuster discovery by the 
inspectors, or an over-the-top sabre-rattling gesture 
from Saddam, the United States and Britain have little 
chance of convincing their opponents on the Security 
Council to explicitly sign off on an invasion - and it 
is only a matter of days before they give up the UN 
procedure entirely. Given the stubborn pacifism of 
France et al., such exasperation is understandable. 
Still, Washington and London should make every effort 
to bring the matter up for a vote at the Security 
Council - even in a losing cause. If they can get the 
minimum nine votes needed to pass the resolution, 
either the French or Russians will be forced to block 
it by exercising their veto power. It will then be 
clear to all who is responsible for the United 
Nations' slide into irrelevance." 
 
2.   "Bush, Blair must give Iraq time" 
The liberal Toronto Star editorialized (3/14): "It's 
amateur hour at the United Nations. If this is Friday, 
U.S. President George Bush must be pounding home his 
view that Saddam Hussein is 'evil' and needs to be 
whacked. Or that he threatens New York with horror 
weapons. Or that he's gearing to hammer Israel. Or that 
he's thumbing his nose at the U.N. Security Council. 
It's getting hard to keep track of Bush's restless 
rationales for war.... Rarely have American and British 
leaders looked so misguided, so ineffectual and so 
isolated. Meanwhile, Saddam sits in 
Baghdad, gloating. This is what comes of trying to 
bamboozle, bully and bribe an otherwise united Security 
Council into a wrongheaded, needlessly 
rushed war.... Yes, Saddam is a dangerous criminal who 
must be denied nuclear, chemical and biological 
weapons. Security Council resolution 1441, passed 
unanimously last Nov. 8, demands that. But it doesn't 
mandate what Bush really wants: Saddam's ouster. Nor 
does it require Iraq disarm by Sunday, as Bush has 
demanded. And for good reason. Saddam has been held in 
check for 12 years. He does not seriously threaten the 
United States, Britain or any other country. He can be 
contained.... Making war on Iraq must be a last resort. 
It could cost $100 billion, result in tens of 
thousands of deaths and create new recruits for terror. 
That's a high price to pay for Saddam's head. 
Especially if Baghdad can be disarmed within weeks 
if the Security Council remains united and presses its 
demands. But it's amateur hour. This farce isn't over 
yet." 
 
3.   "UN must authorize war:" 
In a CBC Radio commentary (3/12), international affairs 
columnist for the leading Globe and Mail Marcus Gee 
reflected that, "However the Iraq crisis turns out, one 
good thing has already come out of it. Everybody is 
talking about the United Nations. Suddenly, the U.N. 
matters. Everybody on both sides of the Iraq debate 
agrees on that.... Saddam Hussein has tried for 12- 
years to get weapons of mass destruction, making his 
country an international pariah, putting his people 
through years of sanctions and allied bombing, and 
foregoing tens of billions of dollars in oil 
revenue.... An Iraq armed with weapons of mass 
destruction, and bent on vengeance for its defeat in 
the Gulf War, would present a risk not just to its 
neighbours, but to the whole world. But have all means 
short of war been tried? Again the answer has to be 
yes. We've had 12-years of diplomacy and sanctions and 
every other kind of non-military pressure. None of it 
has worked. The anti-war camp wants more inspections. 
But inspectors will never uncover Saddam's weapons if 
he does not want to give them up. And once the threat 
of war comes off, Saddam will simply stop co-operating 
again. The United Nations Security Council has passed 
17- resolutions demanding Iraq's immediate disarmament. 
This week it's likely to vote on an 18th. This time it 
must make sure its words mean something. If it misses 
this chance to show it can confront real threats to the 
world, the United States and other big powers will 
simply ignore it next time and the institution will 
become a global non-entity." 
 
SERBIA 
4.   "Serb hope shot dead" 
The centrist Winnipeg Free Press commented (3/14): 
"...Since the fall of Mr. Milosevic, Serbs have been 
politically apathetic. Twice they have failed to turn 
out in democratic elections in sufficient numbers to 
elect a president. Serbia now has an acting president, 
an acting prime minister, an acute political crisis - 
and a challenge to ensure that the good that Zoran 
Djindjic accomplished is not interred with his bones, 
that his dream of a free, democratic, prosperous Serbia 
does not die with him." 
 
CELLUCCI