Letter: Iraq resolution

Randhir Singh Bains
Sunday 15 February 1998 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

IN HIS attempt to justify the use of force against Iraq ("We must act. The threat posed by Saddam's arsenal is terrifying and real," 14 February), Robin Cook failed to answer some fundamental questions.

1. If Saddam is an evil dictator and his possession of weapons of mass destruction poses a serious threat to regional peace, how come his neighbouring countries, to whom he is supposed to be threatening, do not support military action against him?

2. If the main reason for military action is Iraq's refusal to comply with the UN resolutions, why is a similar action not being considered against Israel, which has consistently refused to implement the UN resolution 242 (calling for Israel's withdrawal from the occupied Arab land)?

3. If Saddam has no right to question the nationalities of some members of the UN weapons inspection team, why has the US already struck out the names of Cuban and Iranian nationals from an inspection team due to visit US chemical weapons facilities?

In the absence of a consensus on the UN Security Council favouring the use of force, the impending air strikes on Iraq can only be justified on the basis of consistency, not double standards.

RANDHIR SINGH BAINS.

Gants Hill, Essex

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in