UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - With the United States gearing up for a ``war against terrorism,'' some nations are gingerly pointing out that Washington does not have a blank check for military action from the United Nations or NATO.
Pakistan's military government, for one, a key player in the battle against the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington, has referred to U.N. resolutions to express its caution about military commitments in any operation in neighboring Afghanistan. (Read photo caption below)
Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar on Saturday suggested a United Nations resolution may be needed to authorize any military action against Afghanistan's Taliban rulers. They allow Osama bin Laden, the Saudi Arabian-born millionaire singled out by the United States as a prime suspect in the attacks, to remain in the Islamic nation as a ``guest.''
On Sunday, Sattar said his government would comply with all U.N. Security Council resolutions to combat terrorism. ''Consistent with Pakistan's policy of support for the decisions of the Security Council, the government will discharge its responsibilities under international law,'' he said.
The 15-member U.N. Security Council last Wednesday adopted a resolution expressing its ``readiness to take all necessary steps'' to respond to the strikes in which hijackers slammed planes into the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon near Washington. But that move was a far cry from authorization to take military action.
Italy's Defense Minister Antonio Martini said in an interview with the daily Il Messaggero on Sunday the idea that the United States should seek approval from the United Nations first was ``gaining ground.'' But on Monday, in an interview with Reuters, he unequivocally said Rome was ready to deploy troops and aircraft, if requested.
U.N. ENDORSEMENT REQUIRED?
At the United Nations, the United States could justify military action by relying on Article 51 of the U.N. Charter. That allows ``the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member of the United Nations until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.''
Unlike its efforts ahead of the Gulf War, the United States, for now, has no plans to ask the United Nations for any specific authorization and will probably focus on NATO first, U.N. diplomats said.
And few expect them to in the near future. ``No one around the corridors is saying yet they must not do anything without U.N. endorsement,'' a senior Security Council source said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
While the United States has said it is exploring a range of options in response to the attack, people have begun fleeing Afghanistan ahead of an expected strike.
Secretary of State Colin Powell has not disclosed precisely what he would like Pakistan to do. But the list of requirements was expected to include access to intelligence, cutting off the Taliban's oil supply and freezing its assets. He may also ask that U.S. ground troops and air force be allowed to use Pakistan as a launching pad for any attack on bin Laden and his followers.
In Britain, Prime Minister Tony Blair has called for a global campaign to find the perpetrators ``and destroy their machinery of terror'' after the coordinated strikes that have left more than 5,000 people missing or dead.
But his government has appealed to Washington to deliberate before any retaliatory attack, with a spokesman saying NATO support did not necessarily ``mean a blank check.''
For the first time in its 52-year history, NATO invoked the key Article V of its founding treaty last Wednesday, declaring the strikes were an attack on all NATO members and could prompt a military response. But despite NATO's unprecedented move, the allies made clear they would need another request from the United States for assistance before making any military moves.
In Dublin, Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern said that U.S. action after the attacks on New York and Washington was a right under United Nations law, but he hoped the response would be carefully deliberated.
``Self-defense is a right under the United Nations Charter, so they have the right under international United Nations law,'' Ahern told RTE Irish television on Sunday.
But he said many people were concerned ``that a whole lot of countries are not drawn into this.''
In contrast, former President George Bush, father of George W. Bush, in late 1990 obtained Security Council authorization for driving Iraqi troops out of Kuwait, with then-Secretary of State James Baker flying around the world to lobby 13 of the 15 council members.
Currently, political analysts say, the wording of any resolution would be difficult as the United States itself is not certain yet of what action to take and where to take it.
``They will go to NATO first and then maybe think about the United Nations,'' the Security Council diplomat said.
PHOTO CAPTION:
Pakistani Foreign Minister Abdul Sattar speaks during an interview with Reuters at his office in Islamabad, September 17, 2001. Pakistan said that time was running out for Afghanistan's ruling Taliban government to hand over terror suspect Osama bin Laden and avoid retribution from the United States. REUTERS/Aziz Haidari
- Sep 17 1:03 PM ET