The humanitarian argument that can be used for Iraq in this TL can also be used to justify things such as color revolutions on Russia's doorstep, though.
Okay? But that doesn't stop a humanitarian argument being made.
Maybe you're correct about France; however, in regards to Russia and China, do you really think that they would be willing to support U.S.-led democracy promotion in the Middle East, though?
In this situation, depending on how well Gore can convince them and how he sells the intervention, I think they would accept it- if Chirac is still in power in France and decides to lend support to the intervention, given his relationship with Putin, Russia would drag its feet- mainly because of the implications such a move would have on its regional allies in the near future, but assuming that the intervention is pushed forward with overwhelming evidence to support whatever angle Gore goes for, then they're increasingly unlikely to say no. Abstain, maybe, but the use of their veto in this scenario would sour what were then relatively placid waters between America and Russia. China would go along if France is convinced, and if Russia joins would be under pressure to do so anyway.
Wasn't the anti-war Jacques Chirac the one who was ultimately calling the shots in France in regards to this?
Chirac opposed the war because he didn't believe that the threat being presented by America and Britain justified intervention, instead opting for a diplomatic solution. Again, it's about how Gore would sell the intervention, as well as his personal relationship with Chirac. If he can sell it and his relationship with Chirac is good, then France could lend political support for a broader UN intervention; after all, Chirac saw Saddam's removal as a positive thing, however also saw the way that America went about it IoTL as being unjustified. If it's a later intervention and the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, then it's possible he or his successor would lend political support to ensure the security of the region.
OK.
Also, though, off-topic, but what about the idea of a U.S. invasion of Libya in 2003? Would that have been plausible in place of a U.S. invasion of Iraq during this time?
That's very much
on topic, but I'm afraid I can't answer that one.