War in Persian Gulf area ends; Iraq accepts UN cease-fire, demand for reparations, but calls Council resolution 'unjust.'

The diplomatic end to the 43-day war in the Persian Gulf area came quietly at UN Headquarters in New York after Iraq delivered identical letters to the UN Secretary-General and the President of the Security Council, accepting the terms of a permanent cease-fire arrangement.

In a four-and-a-half page document dated 6 April, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ahmed Hussein strongly criticized, but accepted, Security Council resolution 687 (1991). Adopted on 3 April, the complex, nine-part resolution set terms for a permanent cease-fire.

Among other things, Iraq was called on to accept a 1963 border agreement with Kuwait, to agree to compensate Kuwait for damages it had caused during the occupation and to destroy weapons of mass destruction. A UN observer unit was to monitor a demilitarized zone along a boundary between Iraq and Kuwait.

Mr. Hussein called the text "unjust", alleged it comprised "iniquitous and vengeful measures", and constituted "an unprecedented assault" on the sovereignty and rights of his country.

The UN, he claimed, was applying a "double standard" to Iraq, in the form of "criteria of duality" in international relations. Nevertheless, he stated at the conclusion of his missive (S/22456) that Iraq "has no choice but to accept this resolution".

Five days later on 11 April, Paul Noterdaeme of Belgium, President of the Security Council, formally acknowledged Iraq's acceptance--"irrevocable and without qualifying conditions"--of resolution 687, adding that Council members had asked him to note that conditions established in the resolution had been met and that the formal cease-fire was effective.

A crucial role

for the UN

The United Nations, in an unprecedented way, had played a crucial role throughout the eight-month international crisis, which began on 2 August 1990 when Iraq invaded, occupied and annexed its neighbour--the tiny, oil-rich State of Kuwait--calling it an "integral part" of Iraq.

During that period, the 15-member Security Council, acting in most instances with near unanimity, adopted 15 resolutions related to the crisis, among other things: condemning the initial invasion; calling for Iraqi troop withdrawal and protection of prisoners of war, diplomas and civilians; imposing strong, mandatory, comprehensive economic sanctions against Iraq until it complied with its demands; arranging for aid to innocent victims of the conflict and countries economically affected by the embargo; and setting a deadline before authorizing the use of "all necessary means" to restore international peace and security in the area.

The deadline passed. And a seven-week war took place--waged by a coalition of troops representing 34 nationalities--to oust Iraq from Kuwait.

But even after diplomatic formalities had been concluded, the devastating human, economic and ecological consequences of the crisis remained.

Hundreds of thousands of refugees and displaced persons streamed towards and across borders of neighbouring nations. Bloody civil strife ravaged cities and the countryside in Iraq. Oil well fires raged throughout Kuwait, blanketing that country day and night with polluting smoke. Environmental experts searched for solutions to the damaging consequences of the monumental, some say deliberate, oil spill into the Persian Gulf.

Special missions

Special UN missions were dispatched in early March to assess the situations in both Kuwait and Iraq regarding health conditions, environment, human rights abuses and damage to economic infrastructure.

The UN received reports during the war that at least 50,000 Iraqis had been taken prisoner by the coalition forces and some 33,000 Kuwaitis by Iraq. The release of these troops began in early March.

The return of Kuwaiti property seized by Iraq was also under way, with the Office of the UN Secretary-General arranging for the modalities.

On 9 April, in adopting resolution 689 (1991), the Council deployed the UN Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM) to the area.

'Pause for goodwill'

In a historic and controversial decision--the adoption of resolution 678 (1990) on 29 November--the Security Council had instituted what it called a "pause of goodwill", giving Iraq 48 days to comply with its demand for withdrawal from Kuwait.

It set a deadline of 15 January 1991, after which Member States co-operating with Kuwait--the nations which came to be known as the "coalition" or the "allies"--were authorized to use "all necessary means" to uphold and implement Council resolutions "and to restore international peace and security in the area".

Both quiet and public diplomacy ensued during that "pause of goodwill", culminating in, among other things, a highly-publicized six-hour, head-to-head meeting in Geneva on 9 January between Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz and United States Secretary of State James Baker.

'Polite but unsuccessful'

Despite dim diplomatic prospects, Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar undertook a two-day peace mission to Iraq on 12 and 13 January, meeting for three and a half hours with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, to urge him to comply with the Security Council resolutions.

Returning to New York just before the 15 January deadline, he reported sadly that the talks were "polite but, unfortunately, unsuccessful". He stated: "The world stands between peace and war."

He again appealed to the Iraqi leader "to turn the course of events away from catastrophe and towards a new era of justice and harmony" based on the principles of the UN Charter.

If Iraq would signify its readiness to comply with the relevant Council resolutions, and clear and substantial steps were taken to implement those resolutions, a just peace, with all its benefits, would follow. He therefore urged President Hussein to commence, without delay, the total withdrawal of Iraqi forces from Kuwait.

Once that process was well under way, he assured the Iraqi leader, on the basis of understandings he had received from Governments at the highest level, that neither Iraq nor its forces would be attacked by those arrayed in the international coalition against his country.

With the commencement of withdrawal, the Secretary-General said he would, with the consent of the parties concerned and the agreement of the Security Council, be prepared immediately to deploy UN observers and, if necessary, UN forces to certify the withdrawal and to ensure that hostilities did not erupt on the ground.

He would also urge the Security Council to review its decisions imposing sanctions against Iraq, and encourage a process whereby foreign forces deployed in the area would be phased out.

Finally, he said, he had every assurance, once again from the highest levels of Government, that with the resolution of the crisis, every effort would be made to address, in a comprehensive manner, the Arab-Israeli conflict, including the Palestinian question.

In the tenth year of his tenure as UN Secretary-General, he said, no cause would give him greater satisfaction than to set the Middle East, as a whole on the road to a just and lasting peace. No disappointment, however, would be greater and more tragic than to find the nations of the world engaging in a conflict that none of their peoples wanted.

War breaks out

On 16 January, just after 7 p.m. (EST), it was reported that hostilities in the arrea had begun.

Kuwait informed the Security Council that it was "exercising its right to self-defence and to the restoration of its rights", and in so doing was "cooperating with the forces of fraternal and friendly States which are equally determined to end the obcurate Iraqi occupation." Iraq, it stated, had "deliberately closed the doors to all well-intentioned endeavours".

Saudi Arabia, on whose territory the coalition forces were stationed, stated that military operations had begun because "all efforts, initiatives and appeals" had been "adamantly rejected" by Saddam Hussein, even though it had been possible for him "to avoid the occurrences of these battles to prevent bloodshed".

The United States stated: "Further delay would only have prolonged the suffering of the Kuwaiti people and increased the risks to the military forces of the United States and other States cooperating with the Government of Kuwait."

The better part of the war was waged from the sky, with coalition air forces pounding military, communications and other strategic infrastructure inside Iraq. Meanwhile, Iraq launched regular ground-to-ground SCUD missile attacks against locations in Saudi Arabia and Israel. Part of its airforce fled to Iran to sit out the war.

Israel on 28 January reported to the UN (S/22160) that "destructive and unprovoked" missile attacks by Iraq had caused civilian deaths, injuries and damage to homes and property. Saddam Hussein had also threatened to use chemical weapons against Israel, which had no aggressive intentions against Iraq or any other Arab State, it stated.

The Secretary-General condemned the attacks against Israel, expressing regret that they were spreading the conflict, since Israel was not part of the coalition. He also deplored the fact that the targets were civilians.

On 30 January, the Secretary-General revealed that contingency plans for a possible UN observer and peace-keeping role in the Persian Gulf area were being formulated, and that he was studying a Nordic proposal regarding troop contribution to such a body.

'Massive military

confrontation'

On 1 February, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) had reported that millions of civilians had been caught up in the violence, without shelter or protection against occupation and bombing. The Secretary-General appealed for humanitarian assistance for refugees, displaced persons and civilians in the area.

On 8 February, in a statement before the Council, the Secretary-General said that a massive military confrontation was under way in the region, with immense implications for Iraq, Kuwait and the world as a whole. Diplomatic efforts to solve the crisis should not be put on hold; on the contrary, they should be intensified.

He had watched the developments of the past 23 days "with anguish and regret". As Secretary-General of the UN, he could not but be "saddened by the failure of diplomatic efforts, including my own, and the consequent necessity to resort to force". Until the last moment, he had hoped that the situation between Iraq and Kuwait could be solved peacefully.

On 22 January, the Secretary-General said he had witnessed with "profound grief and anxiety the increasing severity of the war and the widening of the area of hostilities" in the Persian Gulf. He appealed to Iraq to prevent further escalation of death and destruction and the suffering of the peoples in the region by complying with UN resolutions.

Iraqi charge:

'Heinous crimes'

In a series of letters to the Secretary-General, Iraqi Foreign Minister Aziz referred to what he called the "heinous premeditated crimes" being committed against Iraq in order to destroy it.

On 24 January (S/22154), he wrote to the Secretary-General expressing further accusations to the members of the Council and the Secretary-General.

On 30 January, Mr. Perez de Cuellar noted that in requiring Iraqi compliance with relevant Council resolutions, the UN "sought not surrender, but the most honourable way of resolving a crisis in a manner that respected all legitimate interests and was conducive to the wider peace and the rule of law".

UN actions in the present crisis, he said, "must be perceived as part of the larger endeavour of the Organization to establish peace through justice, whenever the one was imperilled and the other denied".

More reports

Iraq sent a series of reports to the UN after the outbreak of hostilities. On 21 January, it said, the United States had bombed a factory producing infant formula. The United States reported that the facility in question had been manufacturing bacteriological weapons. Iraq asked that a UN fact-finding mission investigate the allegation.

Iraq also reported a 13 February bombing of what it called "a shelter for civilians" in Baghdad, housing 400 people. The United States said that that facility was "a military command and control centre".

The United States also had assured the Council that coalition forces, in their air action against Iraqi military targets, were taking every precaution "to minimize collateral damage to civilian facilities".

Iraq on 6 February also declared that it would not pay creditor States, which were participating in the aggression against it, "the amounts corresponding to the compensation owed to Iraq for the damage inflicted on it".

Formal but private

As the war progressed, the Security Council held almost continual informal consultations. States of the Arab Maghreb Union--Algeria, Libya, Mauritania, Morocco and Tunisia--as well as Yemen and Cuba, requested an urgent formal session of the Council. But some Council members, including coalition leaders, opposed such a move.

On 13 February, the Council decided to discuss the matter in a formal but private meeting. Verbatim records of the sessions were to be made public.

Subsequently, the Council formally met six times in private--on 14, 15, 16, 23 and 25 February and on 2 March. No formal action was taken at any of those meetings, although Cuba submitted three draft resolutions, one demanding an end to the bombing of Iraq.

Ready to deal

On 15 February, Iraq informed the Council (S/22229) of its "readiness to deal on the basis of Security Council resolution 660 (1990) with a view to reaching an honourable and acceptable political solution", including withdrawal from Kuwait.

But it linked its commitment for withdrawal to a number of points, including: including a complete and comprehensive cease-fire; annulment of the remaining 11 Council resolutions on the situation between Iraq and Kuwait; withdrawal from the Middle East of forces "participating in the aggression"; and withdrawal of Israel from Palestione and other occupied Arab territories.

Kuwait replied immediately that Iraq's declaration, which contained conditions, "added nothing" to its "stubborn position". Kuwait insisted on "full and unconditional compliance" with all relevant Council resolutions.

In a statement issued in Cairo, the Foreign Ministers of the States of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Syria and Egypt, said the Iraqi proposal contained "unacceptable conditions" and would hamper implementation of Council resolutions.

The United States said the steps the Iraqis were considering would constitute a conditional withdrawal and prevent full implementation of relevant Council resolutions.

On 18 February, Soviet President Gorbachev and Iraqi Foreign Minister Aziz discussed in Moscow specific Soviet peace proposals.

The plan was distributed to the UN Secretary-General and the Heads of State or Government of France, the United Kingdom, the United States and China. On 24 February, just after ground operations were launched by coalition forces, Iraq endorsed the Soviet peace initiative.

On 23 February, Libya wrote to the Security Council President that Iraq was "being subjected to a deliberate process of humiliation". It was clear, it alleged, that the intention "behind what is now taking place is not the recovery of Kuwait", but rather an "operation designed to debase the Arab community, through Iraq, in the eyes of the world".

Kuwait liberated,

Iraq withdraws

On the evening of 23 February (EST), coalition forces launched ground operations, moving hundreds of tanks and tens of thousands of troops from positions in Saudi Arabia into Iraq and Kuwait behind thundering artillery and naval gunfire barrages.

After the start of the ground war, the Security Council held consultations in New York on 25, 26 and 27 February. Its President, Sir David Hannay of the United Kingdom, stated that many Council members wanted a clear, formal and written acceptance of all resolutions if the Council was to move forward.

On 27 February, Kuwait City was liberated. That same day, Iraq informed the Council that it would comply fully with resolution 660 and the other 11 Council resolutions. The same day, Iraq reported that all of its armed forces had withdrawn from Kuwait. It also promised to release all prisoners of war immediately after the cease-fire.

Iraq also within hours informed the Council that it had decided to comply with all relevant Council resolutions. Later, it stated that all its decisions "subsequent to 2 August 1990 regarding Kuwait are null and void".

Beginning at midnight on 28 February (EST), coalition forces were ordered to suspend offensive combat operations, the United States announced.

'Beginning of the end'

"We hope it is the beginning of the end of this terrible tragedy", said Secretary-General Perez de Cuellar a few hours later on the morning of 28 February.

Security Council President Sir David Hannay announced at Headquarters that post-war arrangements, including the lifting of sanctions and the release of prisoners of war, would be discussed in informal consultations.

For about a month, therefore, intensive diplomatic consultations took place on the t erms of a permanent cease-fire, culminating on 3 April with the adoption of Security Council resolution 687 (1991).

Post-war consultations

Initial post-war consultations resulted in the adoption of resolution 686 (1991) on 2 March. By it, the Council affirmed that all 12 resolutions concerning the Iraq-Kuwait situation continued to "have full force and effect".

The Council demanded that Iraq implement those texts, in particular, that it rescind immediately the annexation of Kuwait, accept liability for loss, damage or injury arising to Kuwait or third States and their nationals and corporations, as a result of the invasion and illegal occupation of Kuwait. Seized property was to be returned.

Iraq, the Council also demanded, must cease "hostile or provocative actions" against all Member States, including missile attacks and flights of combat aircraft. Iraq had to provide, the Council said, information and assistance in identifying Iraqi mines, booby traps and other explosives, as well as any chemical and biological weapons and material in Kuwait.

Arrangements must be made for the military aspects of a cessation of hostilities "at the earliest possible time", as well as immediate access to and release of all prisoners of war. The Council welcomed the decision of Kuwait and coalition States to provide access to and commence the release of Iraqi prisoners of war.

Resolution 686--sponsored by Belgium, France, Romania, the USSR, the United Kingdom, the United States and Zaire--was adopted by 11 to 1 (Cuba), with 3 abstentions (China, India, Yemen).

Before voting, the Council rejected 17 Cuban amendments to the draft proposing, among other things, an immediate cease-fire and deployment of a UN peace-keeping force to the area. All reference to the authorization to use "all necessary means" against Iraq would have been deleted.

'No stalling tactics'

Kuwait, in debate, said it hoped that the complete implementation of the resolution would "ring down the curtain on the tragedy written, acted and directed by a regime which was born of aggression and which lived by aggression". The international community would accept no stalling tactics by the Iraqi regime, which should remember that forces allied with Kuwait had the means to impose compliance by force, if it was not forthcoming voluntarily.

The United States said the resolution turned the Council's attention from "a war we never wanted, from the tragedy precipitated by Iraq, to the greatest challenge of all: building lasting peace and security".

The USSR said the Council must completely exclude the resumption of any type of military activities. The security structure in the Persian Gulf must be based primarily on the interests of the countries in the region, which themselves must "unambiguously and clearly define their own interests".

The United Kingdom said the UN could now turn to the more difficult task of helping create a durable system of peace and security in the Gulf region and, more widely, in the Middle East.

China said the resolution fell short of referring to the Council's important role with regard to arranging and monitoring a ceasefire. The extension of the time-limit during which resolution 678 remained effective went against the desire of the peoples of all countries for an early end to the war.

France said the resolution charted the course for a final cessation of hostilities. Without the Council's determination over the past seven months, the "liberation of Kuwait' would not have been possible.

Iraq agrees to comply

On 3 March, in identical letters (S/22320 and S/22321) to the Security Council President and the Secretary-General, Iraq agreed to fulfil its obligations under resolution 686. Iraq's agreement to comply with Council demands stemmed from its determination "to refute the pretexts which some may employ in order to persist in their aggression against Iraq and to inflict further harm on its people".

Iraqi Foreign Minister Aziz on 5 March said that peace, stability, security and justice could not be secured in the Middle East until the Palestinians were guaranteed their legitimate right to establish their free independent State in their territory, including Jerusalem.

The "war plan" against Iraq, he said, was "an American plan". The human r ace was entering "a dark age", an age of domination by a "brutal super-Power over the resources of the world and the international establishment, imposing its will on them with impunity ... distorting the truth as it distorts history".

Kuwait on 6 March informed the Secretary-General that its Government was resuming the functions of State and "directing the affairs of the nation from Kuwait".

The day before, the Amir of Kuwait, in a letter to the Secretary-General (S/22359), stated: "Despite the overwhelming disaster that has befallen Kuwait, we now find some comfort in the fact that the international unity that came into being to repel the aggression has strengthened the position of the UN as an effective international organization."

A powerful deterrent

The measures taken to restore justice now constitute "an international precedent," he concluded, "a powerful deterrent to any overwhelming regime that feels tempted to swoop down upon a smaller State in order to engulf and control it".

He said: "The people of Kuwait join me in expressing profound appreciation and immence gratitude towards the international community, represented by the United Nations, for its noble stand on the side of right and law." He also praised the untiring personal efforts and the noble and scrupulous stand" taken by the Secretary-General for the application of the Council resolutions.

Other concerns

On 3 March, in a statement by the Security Council (S/22322), the Sanctions Committee, established under resolution 661 (1990), was called on to continue to act promptly on requests submitted to it for humanitarian assistance stemming from the situation between Iraq and Kuwait.

Between 6 August 1990 and 16 May 1991, that Committee met 40 times, considering aid requests from 21 countries, each of which had detailed the consequences of the conflict on its economy.

On 22 March, the Sanctions Committee decide to lift the embargo on civilian and humanitarian imports to Iraq. It said that circumstances had arisen in which there was an "urgent humanitarian need" to supply foodstuffs to Iraq in order to relieve human suffering.

During and after the war, other humanitarian and related issues were discussed at the United Nations.

Kuwait, during the occupation by Iraq, had registered numerous complaints alleging human rights violations.

As late as 22 February, Kuwait had reported that Iraqi occupation forces were rounding up Kuwaiti citizens and transporting them to Iraq.

Treatment of prisoners of war and third-country nationals was also a matter of concern. On 17 January, the ICRC had reminded all the parties to the conflict of their commitments as signatories to the 1949 Geneva Convention on the protection of civilians in time of war. The use of chemical and bacteriological weapons, as well as atomic weapons, was prohibited under the international humanitarian law, it stressed.

Kuwait, France, and United Kingdom and the United States were among those protesting Iraq's stated intention to hold prisoners of war as hostages or use them as human shields, in violation of the 1949 Third Geneva Convention.

After the hostilities had ended, Iraq began on 4 March to release prisoners of war it had been holding, with 45--among them Americans, British, French, Italians, Kuwaitis and Saudi Arabians--released to the ICRC by 5 March.

On 13 March, Kuwait complained that only 1,200 of the 33,000 prisoners of war, as of that date had been released.