Christiansborg at War
Krigen på Christiansborg

Berlingske Tidende - Denmark 23. July, 2003 22:30

By Ole Damkjaer

While the debate concerning Iraq's missing weapons of mass destruction raged on in the USA, and especially Great Britain, things in Denmark throughout the Spring and the beginning of Summer remained suprizingly quiet. It looked as if the government would ride out the storm. For the most part it was only the left-wing parties which showed any interest in whether the government with the support of the Danish Folkeparti had sent Danish soldiers to war under false pretenses.

But now the concord has ended. SF and the Enhedslist party's critique is now also getting support from the other opposition parties. Especially Social Democrats have entered the fray after a period during which the party - for good reason - hesitated. Social Democrats were divided regarding the issue as to whether to support Danish involvement in the Iraq war. As is well-known, in the end they voted against it.

This major party held that UN weapon's inspectors should be given more time to uncover the truth regarding Saddam's disputed weapons.

And now the Social Democratic spokesman, Jeppe Kofod, accuses the govenment of misleading the Parliament. This case must ridden to the end of the rails - if necessary with the law of Ministerial Accountability in hand, he threatened.

First and foremost it was the statements of Hans Blix - The former chief of the UN inspectors in Iraq which gave the opposition the taste for blood. Blix said that the Danish government as well as the US and British had overinterpreted weapon's inspector's reports when they argued before the Danish Parliament in support of Danish war involvement.

Foreign Affairs Minister Per Stig Moeller must now labor alone with the opposition, considering the fact that Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen is on vacation. Of course in the first instance, he can just throw the ball back into their own court.

Portions of the information he gave to Parliament concerning Iraq's WMD probably stem from material which the then Radical Foreign Minister Niels Helvig Petersen had used, when he in 1998 asked the Parliament to support a Danish contribution to an impending American attack on Iraq. But this manoeuvre will probably not save the government. For it is not just in the Helvig related material that there are problems.

Per Stig Moeller has, according to the opposition, also over-used Hans Blix in another connection. Up until the decision was made to send Danish soldiers to war, the Foreign Minister was asked by Parliament concerning "what proof there was that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction.

Per Stig Moeller answered by saying that Hans Blix in his reports states that Saddam Hussein has still not as required, presented an accounting for "a considerable amount chemical and biological weapons material".

But in so doing Per Stig Moeller draws a conclusion for which there is no basis, insists Hans Blix now. Because Iraq has not accounted for certain weapons is not synonymous with that they exist, insists the now retired weapons inspector.

In this connection it is worth noting the argument that Per Stig Moeller presented when he a few months ago for the first time was confronted with Iraq's missing WMD.

The Foreign Minister explained, that it wasn't really a determining factor, whether or not Saddam Hussein actually had the forbidden weapons. What was more interesting was, emphasised the Minister, whether the surroundings thought Saddam had them. For because of this the Iraqi dictator could continue to intimidate the surrounding world. Even the lack of knowlege concerning Iraq's weapons justified war.

But Per Stig Moeller shouldn't count on being able to sell this interpretation to the opposition. Professor in constitutional law, Henning Koch, has been quoted by the Danish newspaper Information, as saying that this really amounts to "a perversion of law", if an interevention can now be justified by phantoms and not, "imminent danger", as required by international law.

Finally there is the argument for war that, especially Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen has used. The Prime Minister has stated repeatedly that weapons of mass destruction was not the only grounds for war.

There were also good arguments to support the idea that Saddam Hussein's dictatorship had been unusually bloody, and that the Iraqi regime had cooperated with terrorists.

However, not even this can satisfy the opposition, that maintains the government had only one argument when they, during the middle of March, asked the government to approve Danish participation in the war: Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

If they don't soon appear from beneath the desert sands of Iraq, it can result in a politically extrodinarilly scorching late summer for Fogh Rasmussen and Stig Moeller, who will need to cross their fingers that the American led forces very soon succeed in stabilizing the situation in Iraq. For perhaps this can reduce the pressure on the two Ministers.