Powell & Europeans See United Nations Role in Postwar Iraq (State Dep work for the United Nations)

nytimes.com/ ^ | April 3 2003 | STEVEN R. WEISMAN

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

Powell and Europeans See U.N. Role in Postwar Iraq

RUSSELS, April 3 — The United States and its European allies proclaimed today that they had reached a broad consensus that the United Nations should play a significant role in the postwar reconstruction of Iraq, but they remained divided over many of the details of how extensive that role should be.

After a long day of back-to-back meetings between Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and the foreign ministers of 23 European countries, it was apparent that many of the differences that divided the allies over going to war against Iraq would remain as they faced the issue of Iraq's future.

Mr. Powell said that at least initially the military coalition led by the United States and Britain "has to play the leading role in determining the way forward" but that "this is not to say that we have to shut others out and not to say that we will not work in partnership with the international community and especially with the United Nations."

Sounding a somewhat different note, several European leaders said the United Nations should play more of an organizing role as quickly as possible. The European Union has said that only some kind of an international imprimatur on the occupation can avoid continuing bitterness in the Middle East about the war.

The French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, who led the successful drive to thwart United Nations authorization of the war last month, said that "when the time is ready, we believe that the United Nations should have a central role to play." But he said that as a practical matter, its role could be phased in.

Despite these differences, American and European officials said they were extremely pleased with the relatively harmonious atmosphere they had managed to establish only a few weeks after the United Nations discussions on Iraq dissolved in acrimonious accusations on the eve of President Bush's decision to go to war.

Mr. Powell said he sensed "a coming together of the trans-Atlantic community to work on the rebuilding" of Iraq. And Mr. de Villepin emphasized that France would look past his previous battles with Mr. Powell. "I think we should be very pragmatic," he said.

Mr. Powell kept to a nearly frantic pace here, holding more than 20 one-on-one meetings and broadcast interviews, all intended to demonstrate that the United States still cared about European leaders' opinions.

Few denied that the divisions of the past several months over Iraq continued to be painfully felt. But they sought to emphasize the urgency of getting past them.

The secretary general of NATO, Lord Robertson, was asked whether his optimism about the future meant that all the past divisions had gone.

"I'm always optimistic, but I'm not stupid," he said. "Of course it has been a difficult period to go through, but I believe that after today's meeting we have been through the worst."

Many Europeans cited the need to involve Iraqis in a postwar government as quickly as possible.

Chris Patten, the European Union's commissioner for external relations, said it was imperative not only to have a major United Nations role but also to involve members of the current Iraqi government, as well as the governments of neighboring countries.

"All those things are blindingly obvious," Mr. Patten said. "What is less obvious is exactly how you sequence all these arrangements. I think that even if he didn't know before, the secretary of state is now very well aware of the importance which the European Union attaches to a U.N. role."

United Nations administrators are adamant about their unwillingness to undertake any responsibility unless they are assured of wholehearted international backing.

Mark Malloch Brown, director of the United Nations Development Program, told reporters at the United Nations today that bitter experiences in the Balkans and Africa showed that the United Nations "should never again take on responsibilities for which it didn't have the capacity, the financial resources or the political will."

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

April 2, 2003 8:54 am
United Nations Flag causes Flap on College Campus

A group is asking the University of Southern Indiana to remove a United Nations flag from its Evansville campus.

The newly formed U-S Sovereignty Coalition says the U-N flag has no place on a state-funded campus.

The group's president Larry Young says the Sovereignty Coalition was formed in response to community concerns about the presence of the flag at U-S-I. Y

Young says his group has the support of area Veterans of Foreign War posts, the U-S-I College Republicans, Tri-State Men's Ministry and the Indiana Purple Heart Veterans.

University President Ray Hoops says he understands the group's frustration, but he has no plans to remove the flag.

The U-N flag has been on the campus since 1969.

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

"We must stabilise Iraq," said the French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin. "The UN is the only international organisation that can give legitimacy to this."

[The Old Hoosier]

The State Department is a foreign enemy of the United States.

[a_Turk]

UN to the rescue.. /sarc

Best find some kind of chemicals folks..

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

Some local organizations say they don't want to see the United Nation's flag flown on property supported by tax payers. Critics say the U.N. banner flying at the University of Southern Indiana should come down.

The United Nation's flag has been a fixture on USI's campus since 1969. "The flag display was to represent all of the communities a university serves, the local community, the state community, the national community, and the international community," USI spokesperson Sherrianne Standley said.

But some say the flag has to go. "The taxpayers of this county had no say in buying it or putting it up, but they do have a say in whether it flies," U.S. Sovereignty Coalition spokesman Larry Young said.

Young says the push to take the pennant down started long before the United States began war with Iraq. It started with this letter to USI saying the U.N. is a threat to the sovereignty and constitutional rights of Americans, and no need exists for a symbol of this sort to fly on the property of a school that we, as taxpayers, fund.

"It came to a head with the fact that they're not supporting our troops," Young said.

Young had various group leaders sign the letter to USI, including VFW post 1114 Commander Charlie Lowe, but he says the post's focus is not on the United Nations, and the letter should not have been signed.

"The most important thing until the war is over is the troops," Lowe said.

"Some things were written, and should not have been but it's happened, now we need to move forward, support these troops and support this nation," former Post 1114 Commander Mark Acker said.

"I haven't heard the President withdraw us from the United Nations yet, we're still a member," Standley said.

And until then, USI says this flag will continue to fly.

USI officials say President Hoops received an e-mail Wednesday from VFW Post 1114 member Greg Wagner apologizing on behalf of the post, and District Commander Butch Price for signing the letter asking the U.N. flag to be taken down.

A demonstration against the U.N. flag on campus has been planned for April 13.

[WOSG]

disgusting. fedayeen are still shooting at marines and France already wants to undermine our victory and Iraqi democracy.

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

VIDEO

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

A demonstration against the U.N. flag on campus has been planned for April 13.

[Jason Kauppinen]

Would it be too over the top to burn a UN flag at a rally?

[antaresequity]

The UN could be useful in some our future humanitarian work.

Absolutley under no circumstances should they be allowed anthing more than the regional administration of said work.

No way in hell do they get any 'say so'

[11B3]

It seems as though the new Iraqi government should have the largest amount of say in which way we proceed. Since most of the Iraqi exiles (who will be a major part of that government) were in the west where they could see the parts played by France/Germany/Russia/China, I doubt that they would be allowed to do any reconstruction.

The Iraqi people, once they learn the truth about the months before the war will not tolerate having the French and their friends in Iraq ever again.

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

UN flags should be burned nationwide

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

I propose that we burn a UN flag at every support our troops rally we attend. At every protest rally we Freep, too.

[gettheUSoutoftheUN]

The United Nations is the real Axis of Evil!

[Russell Scott]

The idea of burning the UN flag at pro-American rallies is FANTASTIC!

[FreeSpeechZone]

What's Wrong With Human Rights?: UN idea of human rights is a Trojan Horse for the socialist left

[Knuckle Sandwich Combo]

[Cicero]

Before we get too mad at Colin Powell, keep in mind that this is the New York Times, desperately trying to make trouble.

It is certainly possible. But as far as I know, all Powell has said is that the UN is welcome to give the Iraqis humanitarian aid. Running the place is another matter.

It's always possible that the State Department will run amok, but let's not believe anything the Times says until we've seen some confirmation.

[Chicago]

I have to agree that the State Department often acts like a foreign enemy of the United States and they have been for a long time.

Their appeasing attitude emboldens tyrants. They sent mixed signals to Saddam Hussein prior to him invading Kuwait.

Madeline Albright's appeasing attitude further emboldened our enemies while she was Secretary of State.

At times, Colin Powell is an appeaser. I believe that he played a large role in the US prematurely stopping Gulf War I (while he was Sec. Defense) before we took out Saddam and his regime.

The strength of the US is needed to guide Iraq once Saddam's regime is out of power. It would be a major mistake to let the corrupt French, Germans, and Russians influence the newly freed Iraq before it has a chance to build a sustainable government of the people, for the people, by the people.

The French/German/Russians couldn't care less about supporting a government of the people. I believe they are mostly interested in expanding their influence and would not hesitate to do so by supporting leftover elements of the friends of Saddam, which could risk Iraq returning to a Saddam-like condition. After what we have been through to free Iraq, I don't think that we should allow this risk for at least a few years.