[A-List] Full Spectrum Entropy: Wheels off...

[Sabri Oncu <soncu@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Macdonald,

You speak with certainty, as does Mark, although at least
somewhere in his posts, Mark admits the possibility that he may
be proven wrong.

Below is an article that may be viewed as in support of Mark's
argument. Mark's argument is highly speculative but in my view it
is by no means an impossible to occur scenario. So we now have at
least two plausible scenarios to consider when we do our
organizing. The probabilities each of us associates with these
scenarios are of course subjective.

To sum up, what we need to debate is not which of these "bets"
would win but what we should do in order not to lose no matter
which of them wins.

This is how I see it.

Sabri

++++++++++

THE AMERICAS: Powell steps up diplomatic effort on Iraq
By Richard Wolffe in Washington and Carola Hoyos at the United
Nations
Financial Times; Oct 29, 2002


Colin Powell, US secretary of state, attempted yesterday to
bridge the gap with France and Russia over a new United Nations
resolution against Iraq, saying there would be time for another
substantive debate before the US launched any military action.

Starting what appeared to be a final round of intensive diplomacy
before pushing for a UN vote, Mr Powell said the US was not
planning to take action in the immediate aftermath of what he
expected to be a new Iraqi violation of UN resolutions.

The move came as the Security Council remained divided over a US
resolution as they quizzed Hans Blix, the UN's chief weapons
inspector, and Mohammed ElBaradei, head of the International
Atomic Energy Agency, about the strengthened mandate the text
spells out for inspections teams.

Mr Powell yesterday insisted the US had already compromised over
the threat of force in its initial draft resolution, and that it
would not be "handcuffed" in future action by committing itself
to a second UN resolution. "I think the circle is squared by the
fact that there will be time. The situation is not going to be so
spring-loaded that after the violations are reported . . . that
something happens the next morning," he told reporters.

"It's also clear that it will take some time for people to make a
judgment - not only the Security Council in terms of a resolution
but also the US government and our allies, who might be willing
to move with like-minded nations, like Kosovo, deciding to act in
the absence of a resolution.

"But there will be time for this to be considered - both courses
of action."

The Security Council meeting with Mr Blix and Mr ElBaradei helped
the US garner support for the new weapons regime, although
questions remained about the controversial US suggestion that
inspectors conduct interviews with Iraqis outside the country,
diplomats said. Mr Blix nonetheless agreed to many of the other
measures laid out in the resolution, including demanding a
detailed account from Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction and
the granting of immediate and unrestricted access to all
suspected weapons sites.

He even appeared to support the position that the resolution
should warn Iraq of consequences of if it did not comply with UN
demands. "I think it is desirable that the Iraq understands that
any lack of co-operation, or violation of the origins of the
resolution, will call for reactions on behalf of the Council," Mr
Blix said.

However, Mr Blix said that on top of seeking clarity of mandate,
he was looking for broad council agreement and the "readiness of
the council to uphold the resolution."