Elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina Take Place Saturday

Workers' Daily Internet Edition : Article Index :

Elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina Take Place Saturday

Senior UN Officials Brief Security Council on Return of Weapons Inspectors to Iraq

Britain and the US Demand Security Council Fall into Line

For Your Reference:
Text of US-British draft of UN resolution

Bosnia and Herzegovina's (BiH) first general elections administered solely by BiH authorities will be held Saturday (October 5). Well over 7,500 candidates are running for the three-person presidency and parliament. Nearly 7,000 foreign and domestic observers will monitor the vote. Until now, elections in BiH had been administered by OSCE. That changed with the adoption of the BiH election law.

The country is divided into two administrative entities – the mainly Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) and Croat "Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina" (the Federation) and the mainly Bosnian Serb "Republika Srpska" (RS). Brcko in north-eastern Bosnia is a self-governing administrative unit under the sovereignty of Bosnia and Herzegovina and is not part of either the Federation or RS.

The main point to note is that Bosnia and Herzegovina has been operating under the dictate of Europe and North America since the Dayton Peace Agreement of 1995. During this time, BiH has been groomed to become a member of the "international community" in the definition of the big powers of these continents. It is no accident that the OSCE which has administered elections until now is the same organisation which gave its seal to the Paris Charter of 1991 defining the political, economic and democratic values which only are acceptable to these powers. For example, it was as recently as March 2001 that a "Croat nationalist" was dismissed from his post on the BiH president by the High Representative of the "international community" (officially under the auspices of the UN).

It was the former Lib Dem leader Paddy Ashdown who took over the role of the "international community's" high representative in BiH in May 2002. As is quite well known, Ashdown served in the Royal Marines and became the youngest commander in the special boat squadron. In 1972 Ashdown joined the Foreign Office. Ashdown first visited BiH during the war in 1992 and was among those calling for a stronger military intervention there.

As high representative, Paddy Ashdown oversees the implementation of the Dayton peace accords. He has the authority to impose the country's laws and to dismiss elected officials.

During his two-year term, Ashdown has said that his aim would be to work "with the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to move the country forward towards full statehood within Europe". This is in accord with the British government’s definition of "full statehood" as contrasted with "failed or failing states", which seeks to exclude states from the orbit of the "international community" until they meet criteria set by the big powers of Europe and North America, and hence can be dictated to at will. Opposition to this is what provokes these big powers to intervention up to and including full-scale military action.

The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina was initialled in Dayton on November 21, 1995, and signed in Paris on December 14 of the same year. This agreement to divide Bosnia under the military might of the big powers was signed by the Bosnian, Croatian and Yugoslav presidents. The last signed on behalf of the "Republika Srpska".

The Dayton Peace Agreement in 1995 underlined the unipolar character of the world which the US had sought to bring into being from 1991. However, the big powers within this are contending for the redivision of the world into spheres of influence, and this is one of the main factors for war at the present time. Then as now, under deceptive slogans of fighting for peace and against conflict, the big powers are stepping up their campaign of disinformation about their geo-political and economic aims throughout the world. The consensus of the working class and people behind these aims, longed for by the imperialist powers, has not materialised and these powers are vainly stepping up their attempts to knock the people’s opposition off course.

The working class and people are grasping that imposing an imperialist peace means domination and enslavement of peoples and nations in the interests of the big powers. This drive for domination and enslavement presages an even greater imperialist war.

It is within these circumstances that the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and the Bosnian Foreign Minister Zlatko Lagumdzija signed an Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement on October 2, designed to encourage "bilateral investment flows and strengthen trade and investment links between the two countries".

Thus political and military submission is giving rise to outright imperialist penetration also. Jack Straw said: "This agreement … will boost UK investors' confidence in Bosnia, and open the way to new investments." There are also other measures afoot, such as a Trade and Investment Seminar in London in December this year, to facilitate the plunder of the Bosnian peoples.

Jack Straw went on to say: "I would also like to take this opportunity to encourage the people of Bosnia to vote in Saturday’s elections. The Bosnian people want a bright, prosperous future, so it is essential that they cast their ballot to make their voices heard. And I hope that they will vote for reforms which will take them closer to Europe, and which are key to improving living standards, and creating prosperity." Such talk is a prime example of the deception and chicanery of the imperialist powers.

The working class and people must demand an end to all foreign interference by the British government and the other big powers in Bosnia, Iraq, and throughout the world. They must take a stand of principle, defend the sovereignty of nations and peoples, and take a stand against imperialist military, political and economic dictate. They must uphold the right of a people to adopt the social system of their own choosing. Only the independence of countries and the sovereignty of their peoples, with trade and other international relations conducted on the basis of equality and mutual benefit, can bring prosperity and a just and lasting peace on a global scale.

On October 3, following two days of talks in Vienna with Iraqi officials on practical arrangements for the return of United Nations weapons inspectors to the country, the heads of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) briefed the Security Council on recent developments.

In a press statement released after the closed-door meeting, the Council President said the members "thanked [UNMOVIC Executive Chairman Hans] Blix and [IAEA Director-General Mohammed] ElBaradei and took note of the conclusions they had drawn from their discussions with the Iraqi authorities."

Speaking to reporters after the consultations, Hans Blix said that existing Council resolutions provided the requisite authority for the inspectors to return. "We can go back there, no one denies that we have a legal basis for doing that," he said. "The question was whether one should solve every practical arrangement – we solved a good deal in Vienna – but there are matters and some loose ends that need to be resolved before we go to Baghdad."

He noted that the Council could also work on the text of a new resolution. "It would be awkward if we were doing inspections and then a new mandate with new changed directives were to arrive – it would be better to have those early," he said. "My impression is that there is a good deal of intensity in the talks about that, and we would abide by whatever the Council adopts." Inspectors, he added, "are ready to go at the earliest practical opportunity".

Following the Vienna meetings, Amir El-Sadi, head of the Iraqi delegation, said that he expected UN inspectors to arrive in Iraq in two weeks. When Hans Blix was asked if there would be a delay, he responded, "If the Council puts some new suggestions or directives to us, of course, we are in their hands."

To a question on the presidential sites covered under a memorandum of understanding endorsed by the Council in 1998, he said those areas "are not sanctuaries in the sense that they cannot be inspected; there is a special procedure laid down for it and we are bound by that". At the same time, he noted that the procedure did not allow the same immediate inspections as would be possible at other sites. "I think the Council will consider that," he added.

Mohammed ElBaradei said, "We would like to do effective inspections – that means immediate, unrestricted inspections to all sites in Iraq." Stressing the need to resolve practical issues, the IAEA Director-General said, "We need to align our dates with the deliberations of the Council and I think there was an agreement in the Council that both the Council and us should proceed without a great deal of delay."

"We need unanimous support by the Security Council to be able to do effective inspections," he added.

Following the briefing, deputy US ambassador to the UN James Cunningham said, "There is an understanding in the council that the inspectors cannot go back under existing resolutions." British ambassador to the UN Jeremy Greenstock said, "Many things have been made clear by the discussions this week, but not all relevant and necessary things have been made clear." He further said, "In the view of the United Kingdom, it is going to need another resolution, a resolution that makes it unequivocally clear what the duties of Iraq are in meeting the requirements of disarmament."

At a press conference earlier in the day, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Saltanov said that "In our opinion, it is not constructive to present Iraq with an ultimatum without first having an objective picture."

The British and US governments continue to demand a "new tough and comprehensive" resolution on Iraq by the UN Security Council. They also continue to demand that the other permanent members of the Security Council, Russia, China and France, fall into line. At the same time the US and Britain are also putting maximum pressure on the other 10 members of the Security Council to accept a resolution that has already appeared in draft form.

Reports on this draft resolution indicate that it would require the government of Iraq to make an "acceptable and currently accurate" declaration of its "weapons of mass destruction," including precise locations of such weapons and where research for the production of such weapons was carried out. Iraq would be bound to accept this resolution within seven days. Should Iraq make any "false statements or omissions" or in other ways fail to comply with the resolution, any UN member state would be entitled to use "all necessary means" including military action against Iraq. In other words, the resolution would make Iraq an offer it could only refuse.

The resolution also seeks to give any permanent member of the UN Security Council the right to join the team of inspectors, recommend sites to be inspected, conduct interviews and receive reports of any inspections. Inspectors would also be empowered to declare so-called no-fly and no-drive zones within Iraq with the likelihood that such zones would be enforced by UN or other military forces, in effect a means to occupy Iraq. The resolution also provides for other measures that violate the sovereignty of Iraq.

As far as Russia's position is concerned, the Financial Times quoted Vagit Alekperov, president of LUKoil, saying that Russian President Putin had made the issue of Russia's oil concessions in Iraq a top priority. "I have been hearing guarantees from the Russian government," Alekperov said. Even if the regime fell, he said, "the law is the law, the state is still there." Asked whether he had received assurances that oil was at the top of Moscow's agenda in negotiations with the US, Alekperov said: "Yes, of course."

Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of August 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April, 1995 and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President and noting the additional resolution ( ) issued by the Council as a companion hereto.
Recognising the threat of Iraq’s non-compliance with Security Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security.
Recalling that its resolution 678 (1991) authorised member states to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 and to restore international peace and security in the area.
Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area.

Deploring the fact that Iraq has never provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their component and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear weapons-usable material.
Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly refused to allow access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), refused to co-operate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and international Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), ultimately ceased all co-operation with UNCSOM and IAEA in 1998 and for the last three years has failed to provide immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Committee (UNMOVIC) established in resolution 1284 (1999) as the successor organisation to UNSCOM and the IAEA, as it was first obliged to do pursuant to resolution 687 (1991), and as the council has repeatedly demanded that it do, and regretting the consequent prolonging of the crisis in the region and the suffering of the Iraqi people.
Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organisations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or co-operate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third party nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq.
Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a cease-fire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein.
Determined to ensure full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions with its obligations under resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions and recalling that the resolutions of the council constitute the governing standard of Iraqi compliance.
Recalling that the effective operation of UNMOVIC, as the successor organisation to the Special Commission, and the IAEA, is essential for the implementation of resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions.

Noting the letter dated 16 September 2002 from Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iraq addressed to the Secretary General is the necessary first step toward rectifying Iraq’s continued failure to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions.
Determined to secure full compliance with its decisions.
Acting under chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations.
Decides that Iraq is still, and has for a number of years, in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq’s failure to co-operate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991).
Decides that in order to begin to comply with its disarmament obligations, the government of Iraq shall provide to the Security Council prior to the beginning of inspections and not later than 30 days from the date of this resolution an acceptable and currently accurate, full and complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and unmanned aerial vehicles, including all holdings and precise locations of such weapons, components, sub-components, stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations and work of its research, development and production facilities, as well as all other chemical, biological and nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to weapons production or material.
Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and IAEA immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and means of transport which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded, unrestricted and private access to all officials and other persons whom UNMOVIC or IAEA wish to interview pursuant to any aspects of their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the IAEA may at their discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, facilitate the travel of those interviewed and family members outside of Iraq, and that such interviews shall occur without the presence of observers from the Iraqi government, and instructs UNMOVIC and requests the IAEA to resume inspections by ( );
To that end, demands that Iraq immediately comply with its obligations: decides that Iraq shall submit to UNMOVIC all outstanding biannual declarations, and decides that any permanent member of the Security Council may recommend to UNMOVIC and IAEA sites to be inspected, persons to be interviewed, the conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected and receive a report on the results:
Decides that, in view of the prolonged interruption by Iraq of the presence of UNMOVIC and IAEA and in order for them to accomplish the tasks set forth in paragraph 3 above, the Security Council hereby establishes the following revised procedures, notwithstanding prior understandings, to facilitate their work in Iraq: UNMOVIC and IAEA shall determine the personnel on their inspection teams, except that any permanent member of the Security Council may request to be represented on any inspection team with the same rights and protections accorded other members of the team, shall have unrestricted, and immediate movement to and from inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and buildings, including unrestricted access to presidential sites notwithstanding the provisions of resolution 1154 (1998), shall be provided regional bases and operating bases throughout Iraq, including offices for inspections teams in regions outside Baghdad; shall have the right to names of all personnel associated with Iraq’s chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missile programmes, and the associated research, development and production facilities, teams shall be accompanied at their bases by sufficient UN security forces to protect them, shall have the right to declare for the purpose of this resolution no-fly/no-drive zones, exclusion zones, and/or ground and air transit corridors, (which shall be enforced by UN security forces or by member states;) shall have the free and unrestricted use and landing of fixed and rotary winged aircraft, including unmanned reconnaissance vehicles; shall have the right at their sole discretion verifiably to remove, destroy or render harmless all prohibited weapons, subsystems, components, records, materials, and other related items, and the right to impound or close any facilities or equipment for the production thereof; shall have the right to unrestricted voice and data communications, including encrypted communications; shall have the right to free import and use of equipment or materials for inspection and to seize and export any equipment, materials, documents taken during inspections and shall have the access to any information that any member is willing to provide; further decides that these procedures shall be binding on Iraq:
Decides further that Iraq shall immediately cease, and shall not take or threaten hostile acts directed against any representative or personnel of the United Nations or of any member states taking action pursuant to any Security Council Resolution:
Requests the Secretary General immediately to notify Iraq of the foregoing steps in paragraph 5 and decides that within seven days following such notification, Iraq shall state its acceptance of these steps and the provisions of paragraph 2,3,4 and 6 above;
Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any information on Iraqi attempts, including since 1998, to acquire prohibited items;
Directs the Executive Director of UNMOVIC and the Director General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference with or problems with respect the execution of their mission;
Decides that false statements or omissions in the declaration submitted by Iraq to the Council and the failure by Iraq at any time to comply and co-operate fully in accordance with the provisions laid out in this resolution, shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations, and that such breach authorises member states to use all necessary means to restore international peace and security in the area;
Decides to remain seized of the matter.