Originally posted from 03-30-03 to 04-06-03
Putting Saddam on Ice
by Lady Liberty

From March 24 to March 29, I was privileged to attend the 2003 World Figure Skating Championships in Washington DC. Amidst the extraordinary grace and beauty of the world class skaters, it was surprisingly easy to forget from time to time that the world outside was at war. But when political battle lines were drawn inside the arena, it was impossible for me not to compare the war within from the war without. It goes without saying, of course, that a war in which men and women bleed and die is far more important than one in which athletes may or may not be judged unfairly. None-the-less, there is an interesting parallel, and one which, once drawn, may prove instructive at least as an illustration for your contemplation.

As the first shots of the Operation Iraqi Freedom may be said to have been fired on September 11, 2001, so were the overt hostilities in the figure skating world first escalated in Salt Lake City, Utah at the 2002 Winter Olympics. It was then that Canadian pairs skaters were ranked a close second to a Russian couple as they entered the final stage of competition. During the deciding event, the Russians made a significant and very visible mistake. The Canadians, on the other hand, enjoyed the skate of their lives. The audience in the arena and in front of televisions worldwide all knew they'd seen the Canadians upset the favored Russians. The only people who felt differently were the judges, and the gold medal went to the Russian pair.

Though the judging in figure skating had long been thought by many to be more political and less objective than it should be (comparisons with the inspection process in Iraq don't need to be mentioned here, do they?), for the first time the results were so blatantly unreasonable that skating officials had to take action to still the very loud and public outcry. After investigating, it was discovered that a French judge had made a deal to vote for the Russian pairs skaters in exchange for a vote on behalf of the French ice dancing couple (take note of the fact it's the French and the Russians who've proved to be the stumbling block here and consider again the situation in Iraq). In the end, the Canadian skaters were awarded the gold they deserved, the Russian skaters kept the gold they didn't, and the French dancers won the gold in their discipline so convincingly it was offensive to even consider that someone made a deal for any votes on their behalf.

Much as Saddam Hussein had been warned for years that he had to clean up his act, the International Skating Union has fielded complaints about judging irregularities. Under threat of war, Saddam finally made some concessions and permitted UN inspectors to return to Iraq. And it was under threat to the credibility of figure skating as a sport that Ottavio Cinquanta (president of the ISU) developed and enacted a temporary system of judging that supposedly eliminates deal making and dishonestly among skating competition judges. Unfortunately, much as Saddam's "cooperation" with inspectors proved to be merely another round in the shell game he's played for years, Cinquanta's judging system is largely a pretense, and an unpopular one to boot.

A USA Today editorial printed during the Championships called Cinquanta the most reviled figure in sports, and the crowd present for the World Figure Skating Championships in Washington's MCI Center seemed to agree. Every time Cinquanta was introduced, he was roundly jeered. And each time the new judging system was briefly described, it, too, received loud boos from fans. Under the temporary system (the system will supposedly be replaced at some point by another, currently under development), all of the judges on a given panel judge each performance. Although all of the marks are then displayed in ascending order, only some of the marks are randomly selected to be considered. Even the judges are not supposed to know which marks count. Cinquanta et al say that, if the judges don't know which marks will matter, it will be fruitless to engage in any collusion with other judges. Critics say the anonymity of the system eradicates any possible accountability for bad judging (sort of like Saddam's game of hide-and-seek with weapons not permitted under UN sanctions eliminated any real accountability for his flaunting of the mandates up until now). Reviews of judging will now be conducted regularly and more frequently, but punishments for misconduct have historically been mild or virtually non-existent. In fact, two judges who were previously involved in high-level scandals endured only brief suspensions and were back judging this year's World Championships, much to the very vocal displeasure of some in the audience (and at least reminiscent of the utter lack of repercussions for Saddam when violations of UN agreements have been found).

The plans to destroy weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (once their presence could not longer be denied) were proposed largely by the very people in need of monitoring, which resulted in loopholes large enough to shoot a Scud through. In the same manner, failure to adhere to the rules of judging in figure skating resulted, until very recently, in no more than the equivalent of the diplomatic slap on the wrist reserved for Saddam. Appeasement advocates in connection with the war with Iraq suggest the system has been working, albeit not flawlessly, and they want the existing diplomatic efforts to continue in place of a shooting war. Those in favor of stronger measures say that Saddam has got to go because the danger will remain until the Iraqi leadership is deposed. There are some in the figure skating world that feel much the same about Ottavio Cinquanta (it may be petty to say so, but it's irresistible to point out that Mr. Cinquanta shares the olive complexion, rounded jaw line, and a dark cap of thick hair with, well, you know who).

President George W. Bush, even prior to any war effort, built a coalition of countries who joined in a "comply or else" mandate for Saddam. The coalition did not, and still does not, consist of every country in the world, but it does boast some powerful members. Now a group of figure skating luminaries has elected to form its own coalition to challenge Cinquanta and the ISU. The World Skating Federation made its debut in a news conference during the World Figure Skating Championships. It's an entity formed by a few former ISU officials, and boasts such backers as former champions and beloved skating personalities Scott Hamilton, Kristi Yamaguchi, Katarina Witt, and Dick Button. The stated goals of the WSF are to replace the ISU, clean up the judging system, and to institute severe punishments for judges who cheat, including permanent bans. (Cinquanta claims he has wanted to improve the system for some time, but that it was not his job to do so but rather one for a technical committee which he now says failed to do the job prior to the Salt Lake City fiasco; Saddam says all of the banned missiles were destroyed as the UN demanded, except for the ones he destroyed two weeks ago when inspectors discovered them, and those he's firing at coalition forces now.) Cinquanta refused to comment on the announcement of the formation of the WSF to Washington Post reporters saying only that he's not concerned and that it's "too early" to make any statement.

Meanwhile, as the skating competition entered its fifth day, traffic in downtown Washington DC was snarled Friday morning after anti-war protestors staged a "die in" in the middle of Constitution Avenue. Commuters had to be rerouted until police could handcuff and drag participants out of the road. On Friday afternoon, a group calling itself Skate Fair staged a protest of its own on the sidewalk in front of the MCI Center to express its objections to the secretive nature of the judging system now in use for figure skating.

I readily grant that there's no comparison between the battle within the skating community and the war in Iraq where magnitude and humanity is concerned (I even admit that Cinquanta, for all his apparent arrogance, is entirely benign next to the atrocities commanded and engineered by Saddam). But the political mindset and many uncanny similarities of the two situations demanded notice. It's to be hoped that there's another similarity as well, and that is this: while politicians wrangle, the people have little complaint with each other. Humanitarian aid is streaming into Iraq as you read this essay. And during the skating championships, applause was liberally handed out to athletes from both countries which agreed and disagreed with US policy in the Middle East. (China, which is steadfastly opposed to the war in Iraq, is home to this year's world champion pairs skaters. The two won in a free skate performance that was a testament to courage in the face of adversity, and which was literally breathtaking in its perfection. The crowd was on its feet, shouting and cheering loudly and non-stop, a full thirty seconds before the program ended.) It's also true that, in both circumstances, the problem is obvious and the solution simple. It's the execution of corrective measures that are proving to be the sticking point.

The 2003 World Figure Skating Championships are over now, but the battle over judging has just begun. And the war in Iraq rages on, with little hope for a quick and peaceful resolution. Yet despite everything going on both inside and outside the MCI Center, there was one bright and shining moment for me where nothing mattered but that moment itself. Figure skating fans will understand and forgive me for the lapse when I explain how everything receded into the distance for a few seconds, and I became just another rapt fan who was thrilled to shake the hand of Elvis Stojko.

Originally posted from 03-16-03 to 03-30-03
UNChartered Territory
by Lady Liberty

Last week, I ran across an editorial cartoon which I initially figured to be the work of the typical left-leaning cartoonist. After a moment's reflection, however, it struck me that the artist was actually saying something that was probably unintentional as well as right on the money.

The cartoon in question consists of two panels. On the top panel, captioned "Why we're going to war with Iraq", is a drawing of Saddam Hussein thumbing his nose at the UN Building. On the bottom panel, captioned "How we're going to war with Iraq", is a drawing of George W. Bush thumbing his nose at the UN Building. At first blush, The Denver Post's Mike Keefe appears to be saying, "Look at the pot calling the kettle black! George W. Bush is really not a lot different from Saddam Hussein." At second blush, that's likely exactly what he meant to say. But that's not how I see it!

It is, of course, inarguable that Saddam Hussein is thumbing his nose at the UN. In fact, he's been doing it for years. After the first Gulf War, the UN told Iraq it would have to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and that there would be inspections to ensure that the destruction occurred. After engaging in what was essentially a shell game with UN inspectors - removing weapons from one facility until inspectors declared it clean, and then moving them back in so the next facility could get a passing grade in its turn - Iraq ceased even a pretense of cooperation and kicked the inspectors out of the country. The UN promptly imposed sanctions on Iraq as is outlined in Chapter VII, Article 41 of the UN Charter.

For sanctions to work, countries must suffer. It goes without saying that what that really means is that the people of a country against which sanctions are implemented will suffer. Following a logical progression, once the people have suffered enough we can suppose that they will rise in righteous indignation and replace or reform the bad leader. Unfortunately, while the UN was sanctioning Iraq, it was also responding to those who pleaded that the sanctions be lifted "for the children" or "for the innocent Iraqi people". The bottom line is that the people of Iraq got food and medicine, and Saddam Hussein snickered inside his palace walls because he knew the people were fed and healthy and not threatened nearly enough to brave his wrath by speaking or moving against him. Under the burden of guilt the UN was made to feel concerning the "children and innocent Iraqi people", Iraq was also permitted to sell oil as long as the proceeds were used for more food and medicine. It's a safe bet that some or all of that money was diverted elsewhere because...

...after a dozen years, little about Iraq has changed except that Saddam Hussein has almost certainly retained and rebuilt all of the weapons of mass destruction he was supposed to be destroying, and has probably even developed and built a few new ones. He has even had enough money to spare to offer significant funds to the poor grieving familes of suicide bombers (something he generously publicizes just so anyone thinking about strapping a TNT belt to himself before he gets on a bus will know that his family will be wealthy if he dies) and to covertly (sometimes not so covertly) support terrorist groups such as the infamous al Qaeda.

It took awhile, but the terrorism connection and some serious threats from the United States got the UN to once again decide it would act under the UN Charter to peacefully settle the matter by sending inspectors back into Iraq. Under the threat of military action, Saddam Hussein welcomed the inspectors back into the country and swore they wouldn't find him to be in violation of any agreements. Well, except for some missiles he said he'd destroyed earlier. But he's destroying a few of them now, so that's okay! And there's the newly developed cluster warhead capable of delivering biological or chemical agents to a target. But other than that, he's cooperating this time. Well, and we could talk about the drone plane that's in violation of previous agreements. But he must have been good there, too, since Hans Blix (the chief UN inspector) reported the Iraqi government really was cooperating, and he only made mention of the drone plane some 700 pages deep in the report where it might not be noticed too quickly. As for the significant quantities of anthrax that are "missing", well, anybody could make a mistake on paperwork, so it's probably been destroyed just as we're told it was. Really, it has been!

Meanwhile, despite provisions in the UN Charter (Chapter VII, Article 40) that says decision-making by the UN Security Council should take into consideration failure to comply with earlier agreements, the Council still refuses to move on to the next step as listed in the UN Charter, Chapter VII, Article 42 which includes a variety of actions that may be taken by armed forces. Some members of the Council want the inspectors to be given more time in Iraq before any kind of military step is taken. They're in favor of telling Saddam Hussein - just as they have been for the last decade - to comply or else. Or else what? Perhaps if he doesn't comply, they'll ask him to comply again. That is, after all, the sum total of the consequences Iraq has been dealing with up until now, and it appears there's little likelihood the Security Council will change its tack dramatically anytime soon.

Regardless of what France and Russia believe, President Bush thinks the inspectors have had enough time and that Saddam Hussein has had more than enough time, so he's lobbying the Security Council to authorize military action. His requests almost certainly fall under the UN Charter, Chapter VI, which is nobly titled "Pacific Settlement of Disputes" and which suggests a whole series of steps to be taken to ensure peaceful resolutions for international problems. The Security Council is, however, so hung up on the early Chapter VII Articles that it's not about to move on to the solutions outlined in Article 42 whether President Bush thinks it's past time for that to happen or not.

Interestingly enough, the United States should be less concerned with Chapter VI or VII of the UN Charter and more so with the US Constitution, Section 8. That's the part where it says that Congress has the authority to declare war, not the president alone, and certainly not a loosely knit group of other nations who meet under a Charter alleged to be improperly signed (Congress has authorized military intervention in Iraq, but has stopped short of issuing a formal declaration of war).

In short, getting the UN to move forward, even under its own rules, is like pulling teeth. And that's a singularly ironic metaphor since, as Mike Keefe's cartoon clearly shows, both Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush know perfectly well that the UN is utterly toothless. One man feels free to do as he will, whether it be violations of human rights or outright attempts at genocide, because he knows the UN will authorize little more than it's already done. And in a nutshell, that's been nothing, at least so far as Saddam Hussein's grip on absolute power and the threat to others who cross him is concerned. The other man would like to feel free to do as he will (in compliance with the Constitution and as Congress permits, one would hope), but is attempting to follow form under a Charter that is apparently serving to allow the very group it codified to be as impotent as it wants to be. And it wants to be.

Is a war with Iraq the right thing to do? Maybe. Or maybe not. Regardless, it's becoming clearer on almost a daily basis that the United Nations isn't the answer, either. In fact, the UN is rapidly becoming a problem all its own not to mention a significant threat to national sovereignty. Whether we go into Iraq or not, it's time for serious consideration to be given to getting out of the UN.

[top] [Back to Our View] [2003 archives] [2002 archives] [home]