THE United States defied the consensus of its 1991 Gulf war allies to launch missile strikes at Iraqi targets yesterday, delivering the coup de grace to the residual US-led coalition which drove Iraq out of Kuwait.
In 1991 the US won the support of the Arab League, representing the countries of the region, and of 30 states, including all the permanent members of the UN Security Council. Yesterday Washington took military action alone.
Of the other four members of the Council, only Britain, Washington's most loyal ally, gave the US verbal and limited material support. The other three Council members distanced themselves from the US assault. Russia warned of creating a "dangerous situation" and called for an end to US military action, while China urged "restraint".
France expressed concern about the "evolution of the situation in Iraq" and revealed it had been negotiating an Iraqi troops withdrawal from the Kurdish area with Iraq's Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Tariq Aziz, at the time of the US missile strike.
Japan and Germany supported the US, while Spain said its action was "not justified".
Following Iraq's intervention on Saturday on behalf of the Kurdish Democratic Party in the factional conflict in northern Iraq, Washington failed to secure support for military action against Iraq in the Arab world.
The Arab League and key Arab members of the 1991 coalition - the Gulf states and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Syria - all opposed the US action, as did Jordan.
There were several serious reasons why Washington's former allies opposed this action.
The first was that Iraq's intervention in the conflict between the warring Kurds was seen as a domestic matter. Also, Baghdad appeared to have a casus belli because Iran's intervention on behalf of one of the Kurdish factions had threatened the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country.
Although many members of the international community, particularly the Arabs, recognised this threat, the US ignored it and in so doing appeared to bolster Iran's position in the Kurdish area. Gulf states see this as a threat to their own security.
Another reason was that there was no clear legal mandate for the US attack. As long as Iraq does not repress the population of the Kurdish "safe haven", outside powers have no justification for intervention, under Resolution 688.
The aerial exclusion zones imposed by the US, UK and France, which are of doubtful legality, do not ban Iraq from sending its ground forces into the area above the 36th parallel, which defines the southern edge of the exclusion zone.
Yesterday the League condemned the US action as an "infringement of Iraqi sovereignty". The League's Secretary-General, Mr Esmet Abdel Maguid, also said the attack was "unjustified" as Iraq was "not in breach of Security Council resolutions", an assertion with which the UN Secretary-General's spokeswoman, Sylvana Foa, agreed. She said the US had strayed into a "grey area" in terms of international legality.
In addition, an unfavourable comparison has been drawn between the prompt US reaction to Iraq's moves in the Kurdish area and Washington's tolerance of repeated Turkish military incursions and the recent Iranian intervention as well as Israel's April 16th assault on Lebanon.
Finally, Arab members of the Gulf war coalition have been bitterly disappointed by the US failure to secure Israeli withdrawal from occupied Arab territory, honouring a promise to the Arabs when they joined the 1991 coalition. And this failure has created serious political problems for these Arab governments with their own people.