More Than a Feeling

-->
Bush Administration, Iraq War

When The Guardian reported last February about another Downing Street memo in which President Bush suggested luring Saddam Hussein into war by “flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours,” there was much scoffing and hoo-hawing from the Right.

But today the New York Times reveals that the memo is real. Don Van Natta reports,

During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he [Bush] made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second [UN] resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair’s top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.

“Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning,” David Manning, Mr. Blair’s chief foreign policy adviser at the time, wrote in the memo that summarized the discussion between Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and six of their top aides. …

… Stamped “extremely sensitive,” the five-page memorandum, which was circulated among a handful of Mr. Blair’s most senior aides, had not been made public. Several highlights were first published in January in the book “Lawless World,” which was written by a British lawyer and international law professor, Philippe Sands. In early February, Channel 4 in London first broadcast several excerpts from the memo.

Since then, The New York Times has reviewed the five-page memo in its entirety. While the president’s sentiments about invading Iraq were known at the time, the previously unreported material offers an unfiltered view of two leaders on the brink of war, yet supremely confident.

The memo indicates the two leaders envisioned a quick victory and a transition to a new Iraqi government that would be complicated, but manageable. Mr. Bush predicted that it was “unlikely there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups.” Mr. Blair agreed with that assessment.

The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein. …

… Two senior British officials confirmed the authenticity of the memo, but declined to talk further about it, citing Britain’s Official Secrets Act, which made it illegal to divulge classified information.

Along with the U2 reconnaissance aircraft idea, attributed to Bush, the memos reveal Bush made two other suggestions: Finding a defector who would talk publicly about Saddam’s WMDs, and assassinating Saddam.

One quibble I have with the Times story is this:

By late January 2003, United Nations inspectors had spent six weeks in Iraq hunting for weapons under the auspices of Security Council Resolution 1441, which authorized “serious consequences” if Iraq voluntarily failed to disarm. Led by Hans Blix, the inspectors had reported little cooperation from Mr. Hussein, and no success finding any unconventional weapons.

In late January 2003 Hans Blix reported to the UN Security Council:

Iraq has on the whole cooperated rather well so far with UNMOVIC in this field. The most important point to make is that access has been provided to all sites we have wanted to inspect and with one exception it has been prompt. We have further had great help in building up the infrastructure of our office in Baghdad and the field office in Mosul. Arrangements and services for our plane and our helicopters have been good. The environment has been workable.

The inspection process was not without problems —

While we now have the technical capability to send a U-2 plane placed at our disposal for aerial imagery and for surveillance during inspections and have informed Iraq that we planned to do so, Iraq has refused to guarantee its safety, unless a number of conditions are fulfilled. As these conditions went beyond what is stipulated in resolution 1441 (2002) and what was practiced by UNSCOM and Iraq in the past, we note that Iraq is not so far complying with our request. I hope this attitude will change.

Is this what put U-2 planes in Dear Leader’s head? The Blix report is dated January 27, 2003. The Downing Street memo under discussion was dated January 31, 2003. Hmmm.

Juan Cole reported on February 4, 2006:

For all the world like a latter day Gen. Jack Ripper as depicted in Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove, Bush was going to fly a US spy plane over Iraq painted in UN colors, in hopes Saddam would have it shot down, so as to provoke a war (and ‘protect our precious bodily fluids?’). This crackpot idea suggests the truth of the rumors that Bush never really did give up drinking heavily (or maybe it can only be explained by doing lines). Its context is explained by a kind reader who wrote in about my initial puzzlement to say:

    ‘ The Bush administration did get Saddam to agree to allow U2 flyovers under the nominal control of UNMOVIC in February. It seems likely that they expected Saddam to refuse, thus provide a suitable excuse for war. When he didn’t, they upped the ante by sending two at once in mid-March. The Iraqis still refused to shoot at them and instead complained through official channels.’

I’m looking for confirmation of this information, but so far all I’ve found is broken links. I’ll update this post if I find something. [Update: See comment from Ron Brynaert. More comments.]

Update: Historical revisionism per Captain Ed

By the time Bush met Blair at the White House, Hans Blix had reported that the Iraqis would not cooperate with the inspections, only paying lip service to the inspectors.

Already debunked, above. Blix reported some problems, but it was far from the truth to say that Iraqis “would not cooperate.”

Now, thanks to captured notes of Iraqi meetings, we know that Saddam remained confident that his bribery of France and Russia (as well as their well-known economic interest in maintaining their contracts with the Saddam regime) would result in a stalemate at the Security Council over any resolution opening military force as a consequence of failure. That may be why France practically begged Blair at that moment not to pursue a “second resolution” (actually a 17th); they assured both the US and the UK that the previous sixteen resolutions gave plenty of cause for action, but that France would find it politically impossible to vote for explicit military action against Iraq.

Ed, dear, the whole point of Bush’s and Blair’s conversation was to find a way either to force the UN’s hand in spite of the Security Council’s reluctance to issue a second resolution or to establish “cover” to make the invasion seem more legitimate without a second UN resolution. If anything, your “objection” underscores the importance of the January 31 memo.

By this time, had the US not had a plan for military action against Iraq, it would have been almost criminally neglectful. Why should it surprise anyone that two nations that faced war with Saddam Hussein would discuss the military strategy involved in that war?

This amounts to a stubborn determination not to see the point. Richard of the Peking Duck gets it –

In ordinary times, it would be a bombshell: A secret memo proves that our president told his people a series of lies leading to wanton and needless death and destruction. He had planned to wage his war no matter what, and was even prepared to create fake evidence to justify the invasion. It was never about unconventional weapons. The calls to disarm were bogus. It was to be war from day one. In ordinary times, he’d be impeached.

But these aren’t ordinary times. We are all so used to this sort of thing that it has almost no effect at all. It’s just another day in the Age of Bush, where we’re always winning the war and we’re always right and no mistakes are ever made. Here’s the killer line (though actually there are several):

    The memo also shows that the president and the prime minister acknowledged that no unconventional weapons had been found inside Iraq. Faced with the possibility of not finding any before the planned invasion, Mr. Bush talked about several ways to provoke a confrontation, including a proposal to paint a United States surveillance plane in the colors of the United Nations in hopes of drawing fire, or assassinating Mr. Hussein.

Now, faking scenarios in order to provoke another country into war is just what Hitler did with Poland, and is about the lowliest thing a government could do. It an act of pure deception and reveals total disrespect for the American people, playing them for fools. That he would have seriously proposed this should be major news. But I doubt it will be. We expect no better of him. And so, what would have been a death knell for Clinton will be water off a duck’s back for Bush. We’re too numb, too incredulous and dazed to care.

Or too drunk on Kool-Aid.

Update update: See also Tom Tomorrow.

Share
11 Comments

8 Comments

  1. Ron Brynaert  •  Mar 27, 2006 @9:43 am

    FoxNews.com March 11, 2003
    U.S. Suspends U-2 Flights Over Iraq:

    Ewen Buchanan, a spokesman for UNMOVIC, the U.N. inspection agency, said in New York that Iraqi authorities “expressed surprise” when notified of the flights and the agency requested the planes turn back. Further U-2 and Mirage reconnaissance fights are planned, he said.

    “I can confirm that two U-2 reconnaissance aircraft operating on behalf of UNMOVIC operated in Iraqi airspace this morning. Although Iraq had been notified of a flight time window, they expressed surprise and concern that two flights were operating simultaneously. In the interest of safety UNMOVIC requested the aircraft to withdraw. Further U-2 and Mirage reconnaissance flights are still planned.”

    The statement made no reference to Iraq launching fighter jets, nor was it critical of Baghdad in any way.

    Multiple flights are permitted under a U.N. Security Council resolution approved last November, and the Bush administration sought clarification from U.N. inspectors after the U-2 flights were suspended.

    A senior U.S. official said the U-2 flights that were diverted were the seventh and eighth sent on a surveillance assignment since the Security Council approved the resolution unanimously, and that the flights had been coordinated with the U.N. inspection agency.

    But Iraq “raised a fuss,” this official said, and the two flights were recalled.

  2. maha  •  Mar 27, 2006 @9:47 am

    Thanks, Ron. Iraq “raised a fuss,” did they? Well, nuke ‘em

  3. Ron Brynaert  •  Mar 27, 2006 @9:55 am

    CTV News, Mar. 11 2003

    Suspicions were heightened because the second plane flew across the Saudi border into Iraq, rather than the usual route missions have flown from Kuwait, Amin said.

    U.S. officials said the jets threatened the U.S. planes, forcing them to abort their mission and return to base. A Pentagon official said the decision to end the mission was made “in the interest of safety.”

    Iraqi officials presented a different version of events. It was the UN inspectors that ordered the two planes to leave Iraqi airspace, Amin told reporters at a hastily convened briefing at the Information Ministry.

  4. Donna  •  Mar 27, 2006 @10:14 am

    Captain Ed’s “stubborn determination not to see the point” reminds me of something I heard a Bush supporter say recently to his ten year old child: “See, it is dangerous to think about something yourself…..you must listen to what authority tells you.” [This admonition was delivered after the ten year old had softly spoken his own thought about a issue..... I shuddered to think of what the developmental outcome would be for this young person.]

    The bubble inhabited by Bush must feel like a safe place for the kool-aid drinkers to also inhabit. All one needs to do ‘in the bubble’ is to fend off independent thought or pesky intruding facts.

  5. Britwit  •  Mar 27, 2006 @2:41 pm

    This is off topic – but wanted to post –

    NBC news on B’ham, AL TV announced Sat., 3/25 that a bill was going to be presented to ban abortion in the state and that it would be similar to the SD bill that was signed by the Governor there.

    The B’ham Newspaper on Sun., 3/26/06 mentioned the two MEN
    who have proposed the bill. I will have to read the paper again to post the names of these two redneck red state men.

  6. Donna  •  Mar 27, 2006 @2:57 pm

    Didn’t the Bush Administration, in December of ’02, improperly take possession of Iraq’s 11,000 pages of documents [re: WMD] submitted to the UN Security Council, and then only forward around 8,000 pages on to the rest of the Council? I am just wondering if this action was also a way to undercut informational facts about Iraqi cooperation at a time when the neocons were itching for war?

  7. Britwit  •  Mar 27, 2006 @5:53 pm

    When I say it is off topic for the subject blog–it is a f—ing subject issue.

    The redneck state of red AL is going to try to do a ban on abortion!

  8. Gideon S.  •  Mar 28, 2006 @4:03 pm

    Thanks for the post, and the link to Peking Duck; I’m still stunned that this story hasn’t garnered more attention from the news media and (especially) from Democrats in Congress.

3 Trackbacks



    About this blog



    About Maha
    Comment Policy

    Vintage Mahablog
    Email Me


















    Support This Site







    eXTReMe Tracker













      Technorati Profile