Blair plays down the UN's role in rebuilding Iraq

The Daily Telegraph ^ | March 27, 2003 | George Jones, Ben Brogan and Toby Harnden

[MadIvan]

Tony Blair sought last night to avert a rift with President George W Bush by agreeing that the United Nations' role in post-war Iraq should be limited to humanitarian aid until America and Britain had made the country safe.

As he flew to Washington for a war summit with President Bush, the Prime Minister described as "premature" talk of the UN's role in running the country immediately after the conflict.

"We don't know what the situation is going to be when you get to the post-conflict situation," he said.

In an attempt to maintain the allies' unity after a series of setbacks during the first week of the conflict, Mr Blair played down differences between Britain and the US over the future of post-Saddam Iraq.

There is intense scepticism within the Bush administration about allowing the UN anything more than an involvement in humanitarian relief in Iraq. Mr Blair faced some private criticism for pressing the case for a further UN resolution before the conflict.

Officials have said that seeking a UN Security Council resolution to give the world body an executive role is a non-starter and Mr Blair's comments were a recognition of that sentiment.

Nile Gardiner, a fellow at the Heritage Foundation think tank, which is close to the White House, said: "The Bush administration really has no stomach for going back to the UN. Mr Blair is going a bridge too far by pressing the UN issue in post-war Iraq."

Earlier, Mr Blair faced questioning from MPs who feared Mr Bush would be unwilling to allow the UN to play a central part in rebuilding Iraq.

Iain Duncan Smith, the Conservative leader, said it was clear that Mr Bush was "deeply sceptical" about any role for the UN.

Mr Blair assured MPs of his personal commitment to ensuring that the post-war administration in Iraq had the backing of the UN.

He said both he and Mr Bush had made clear "that any post-conflict Iraq administration has to be specifically accepted and endorsed by the United Nations".

But he acknowledged that the timing and details of any handover to a civilian administration had yet to be agreed.

Mr Blair stressed the importance of ensuring the safety of American and British soldiers before handing over to the UN.

"We will obviously have to discuss the details of how we make the handover to civil administration in Iraq because it is important both to protect our own troops and make sure, frankly, that they did not give their lives in vain," Mr Blair said.

It was important that a post-conflict Iraqi administration had the full endorsement of the UN because it would release funds and allow the international financial institutions to operate in a more effective way.

But a more immediate priority was to secure UN agreement to get Iraq's food for oil programme up and running again. He would have discussions with Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, in New York today on how money in the programme could be used for humanitarian relief.

On the flight to Washington yesterday, Mr Blair emphasised the importance of stabilising Iraq.

He said it could take some time to ensure that Iraq had the proper security and a government that was representative and cared about human rights: "The idea that you suddenly rush into the UN, that's what's causing the difficulty."

Mr Blair said the next couple of days would not determine what the post-conflict situation would be like. The immediate priority was to get the oil-for-food aid programme sorted out.

He said of his two-day talks with Mr Bush: "We will discuss the military situation but that's not the only purpose of the visit either. It's to go through in a reflective way all the various issues."

[TLBSHOW]

WILL THE REAL SOCIALIST PLEASE STAND UP?

The answer lies in the complicated politics of the situation. It was Tony Blair who rightly pointed out that the UN had clearly, and for many years, willed as an end the disarmament of Iraq, but had failed, when it came to it, to will the means. But it is the same Tony Blair who, at Camp David today, is pushing George Bush in the direction of the UN.

http://www.dailytelegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/03/27/dl2701.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/03/27/ixnewstop.html

[agincourt1415]

Hey, Iraqi might make a good 51st STATE.

Just kidding.

We didn't do that bad a job with Japan in World War II.

[expatpat]

It's interesting to note the way the Iraqi (the one shaking the soldier's hand) has his head and face bundled up. It's either against the sandstorm or, more likely, to avoid being recognized by Sadaam's thugs.

[SarahFree]

I think the Frogs said they would veto again because they didn't want to look like they're endorsing the war. So, we'll end up doing it w/o the UN anyway.

[Bob J]

Tonight we welcomew new show host TOM ATKINS! *GARY ALDRICH Former FBI agent, Author of Unlimited Access Gary will discuss his new book, and America's current political situation.
*PIERRE DE HAIL Former French Special Ops fighter, president of Risk Management International Pierre will offer exceptional insight in the Iraq war, and controversial opinions on France, Europe

Click HERE to listen LIVE while you FReep! HIFI broadband feed HERE! (when available)

Would you like to receive a note when RadioFR is on the air? Send an email to radiofreerepublic-subscribe@radioactive.kicks-ass.net!

Click HERE to chat in the RadioFR chat room! OPEN AND CHATTING NOW!

Miss a show?

Click HERE for RadioFR Archives!

[river rat]

First Baghdad, then on to Paris
That syphilitic bastard in North Korea will have to wait his turn.


Semper Fi

[TLBSHOW]

British Prime Minister Tony Blair is expected to meet UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday to discuss the war in Iraq and the deteriorating humanitarian situation.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_221433,0005.htm

[TLBSHOW]

Before leaving for the U.S. today, Blair said he believed any postconflict Iraqi administration should have the full endorsement of the UN.

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/03/26032003171516.asp

[TLBSHOW]

Monday 24 March 2003

Statement by the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, on the Iraqi conflict to the House of Commons

SNIP



At the European Council, there were of course deep divisions over the coalition action. That is well known. But it is not that all of European opinion is one way.

On the contrary, there was both understanding and support for the British position from many nations represented at the Council and near unanimous endorsement from the 10 accession countries who joined our Council on Friday afternoon.

In any event, whatever disagreements about the conflict itself, Europe came together to set out clearly its wishes and responsibilities in post-conflict Iraq.

The Council agreed the need to be active in the humanitarian field and to

ensure that the oil revenues are held for the Iraqi people by the UN and that the Oil for Food programme continues.

The Council further agreed that the UN Security Council should give the UN a strong mandate for post-conflict Iraq and make sure that the new administration is one that is representative, careful of the human rights of the Iraqi people and allows the people to live at peace inside Iraq and with its neighbours.
http://www.labour.org.uk/tbiraqcommons240303/

[Benjamin Dover]

Uhhhmmm...am I naive, misinformed or stupid? Is Coffee saying the "food for oil" program is still relevant....even after the war? That resolution is histoire. It was all a penalty levied to make Saddam conform. Now that he's gone, WE'LL open the oil spigots wide-open and WE'LL decide how the massive revenues are used. Coffee thinks he can wave a now-outdated piece of paper to legitimize the UN's control of Iraqi assets? He must have Al Gore's lawyers on the payroll.

I think there is a role for the UN. They can ladle the soup, blow up the balloons for the kiddies, coordinate the port-a-potty cleanings, act as crossing guards and otherwise perform duties our militaries are not meant to do. This will also ensure other nations' money will be used in the liberation. As long as Blair and Bush have a veto, the UN is at our disposal. We should NOT get out of the UN just yet.

The waiter is tallying up the bill. Coffee will not allow France, Germany and Russia to sneak off to the toilet. His power is at stake. If he does, our point is made. The UN is no more.

[MadIvan]

You're working yourself up into a froth over nothing; note what Blair is saying - he is asking for the endorsement of the UN for the new administration, not the UN itself to administer it. If it fails to get the endorsement, well, Blair will go along with it anyway.

And Blair knows it won't get that endorsement. The French have blocked the way. This is about silencing Labour MPs more than anything else.

I don't mind the UN playing a role in distributing food; after all, that UNICEF money has to be spent sometime.

Regards, Ivan

[Wisc Paul]

DO NOT GIVE KOFI and the un ANY FUTURE ROLE IN ANYTHING, other than the smallest of relief efforts, where the U.S. and its allies control the purse strings, and only until the ultimate fate of the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US - In fact, that should be a poster that should be carried by protesters in front of the UN - If I lived in NY, I'd be picketing the UN - Anyone in FR in the NY area up for that?

[TLBSHOW]

I don't want the UN to do one thing. After what they have been exposed as, anyone that would want the UN involved has a screw loose!

GET THE UN OUT OF AMERICA AND GET AMERICA OUT OF THE UN

as for British people like Tony I can't speak for them I just post what they say and do!

[CFC__VRWC]

A politically clever move might be to avoid the UN entirely, but get the leading nations of the Coalition to run it - probably a far more international administration than the UN ever would be. Have Australian, British, American, Spanish, Polish and Danish administrators in the lead.

If this is what I think it is, then this approach is a brilliant piece of strategy by Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush. Throw M. Chirac and the rest of the UN jackals a little bone to whet their appetites and quiet them down for the moment. Then, once we are able to deal from a position of greater strength (i.e. after we find the massive caches of chem/bio weapons and all the other banned miltary hardware, prominently marked with Made in France/Russia/Germany/China), slam the door shut and tell Kofi and the boys to go pound sand.

[TLBSHOW]

direct from Blair.........


http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3347.asp

At his latest press conference, Prime Minister Tony Blair said:

'...in addition to pursuing our military campaign with vigour and determination, we are also determined in the wake of military success to bring humanitarian relief to the people of Iraq. The most important humanitarian priority is to restore the operations of the Oil for Food Programme.'

The UN's Oil for Food programme provides over 60 per cent of Iraqis with food, water and medicine, added Mr Blair.

The Prime Minister announced that he would meet President Bush at Camp David, 'to discuss not just the military campaign, but also the diplomatic implications of recent events for the future', and that he would meet UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in New York.

He stressed that 'the United Nations must be centrally involved in dealing both with the humanitarian crisis and in helping Iraq rebuild itself once Saddam has gone'.

[MadIvan]

I don't want the UN to do one thing. After what they have been exposed as, anyone that would want the UN involved has a screw loose!

Millions of well meaning people gave money to UNICEF. You and I did, through taxation. Before they go bankrupt, they may as well drop some of that cash on Iraq.

as for British people like Tony I can't speak for them I just post what they say and do!

Not really. You try and put things in the most negative way possible - I respect your honesty, but you're not subtle and that deficiency means you're missing the real story.

Regards, Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

see 35.... that is the real truth from blairs mouth

the UN must be involved, did you know Clinton did a story for his site a few days before the war?

[livius]

probably a far more international administration than the UN ever would be

Not only that, but much, much more functional as well.

[TLBSHOW]

Get the spin right I know you are above spinning falsehoods on this matter.... now again from Blairs own mouth about the UN.......

QUESTION:

I wonder if I could ask you a bit about the politics of all this, because you have told us you want to secure not just the UN resolution on Oil for Food, which I think everyone is agreed will go through, but a UN resolution on the political structure of Iraq after any conflict.

Now the French, the Germans, the Russians have all said that they oppose that plan as you have suggested, that they want a UN mandate, they don't just want UN involvement, and we also of course have a situation in northern Iraq and the position of the Kurds. So how are you going to build a political framework? And secondly can you guarantee that the people in northern Iraq will have the same degree of autonomy that they currently enjoy in any post-war settlement?

PRIME MINISTER:

Just on the latter point, obviously one of the extraordinary things that has happened in Iraq over the past few years, only as a result of the British and American pilots policing the No Fly Zone, is that the autonomy people have gained in northern Iraq has allowed them to live a far better life. For example the child mortality rates I was explaining to you, I specifically said were in the centre and south of Iraq, because in the north of Iraq child mortality has been falling, and has been falling because they have got greater freedom from Saddam. So without going into the details of what any post-Saddam Iraq might look like at the present time, we would obviously not want to give up the considerable gains that people in the north have made.

Secondly in relation to the UN, there are two issues here. The first is in respect of humanitarian assistance we need a resolution through on that and I am confident that we should be able to secure that.


There is going to be a debate about the UN resolution that then governs the post-Saddam civil administration in Iraq. We are quite clear that any such administration has to be endorsed by the United Nations, it is important, and that is exactly what we said at the summit in the Azores. Now the details of that we will discuss with allies within the UN and with others.

There may be certain diplomatic difficulties but I think in the end people will come together and realise that it is important that any post-Saddam Iraqi government has the broadest possible representation, is respectful of human rights, is careful to preserve the territorial integrity of Iraq, and the important thing after all the diplomatic divisions that there have been is that the international community comes back together, and I hope that it will.http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page3347.asp

[dogbyte12]

CUT and Paste finger might need strength during war Todd, give it rest for long battles ahead.