Posted on 05/09/2003 5:56:18 PM PDT by Utah Girl
Britain and America yesterday asked the international community to grant them a sweeping mandate to rule Iraq as "occupying powers" for at least a year, effectively relegating the United Nations to an advisory role.
A toughly worded draft resolution, handed to the UN Security Council, called for the immediate lifting of 12 years of sanctions against Iraq and the use of oil revenues to fund reconstruction.
Despite several ringing clauses about the duties of a UN special co-ordinator for Iraq, critics will say it falls far short of the "vital role" agreed by Tony Blair and President George W Bush last month.
While the draft spoke of the UN supporting, facilitating or promoting the creation of a new Iraq, the military victors laid claim to absolute control of Iraq's oil revenues, the assets of the former regime, and the process of forming a future Iraqi government.
This set the stage for a fresh battle within the Security Council, with France and Russia indicating concern.
President Jacques Chirac said France would discuss the resolution in "an open and constructive spirit", but repeated his desire for the UN to play a "central role" in rebuilding Iraq.
M Chirac, whose relationship with Washington is in the deep freeze, declined to be more specific. Diplomats in Paris said he wanted to test the water to see how much support France had for a new move to rein in America.
Sergei Lavrov, Russia's UN ambassador, said only that Moscow had a "long list" of questions.
Despite sharp questioning of elements of the draft - notably its silence over any return for UN weapons inspectors - the mood in the Security Council appeared battle weary. Many smaller countries are reluctant to revisit the bitter fights that preceded the toppling of Saddam Hussein. The draft calls for the immediate lifting of all restrictions imposed after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990, except for the arms embargo.
Britain supports the return of UN inspectors, arguing that the world will be more likely to believe any discovery of banned weapons if it is verified by international inspectors.
Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, held the door ajar. He said the security situation was too perilous for UN civilian inspectors to operate inside Iraq now, but their return "might very well make sense" at some point.
He said America would keep as many troops as were needed in Iraq - "as long as it takes" to allow rebuilding "in a fashion politically and economically that makes sense".
Talk of a year-long military presence was just a guess.
The resolution would phase out the oil-for-food programme after four months. It calls for all proceeds from oil sales to be placed in an Iraqi Assistance Fund controlled by the US and Britain, "until such time as a new Iraqi government is properly constituted and capable of discharging its responsibilities".
Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, told Channel 4 News: "We do provide for a very key role for the UN in humanitarian operations, in reconstruction work.
"If people look at the resolution they will see that the idea that oil money is going to be used for the benefit of the coalition is total nonsense.
"Someone has to actually physically control what happens with the oil and that has to be the 'occupying power' under international law. That's the reality.
"But under clear mandatory paragraphs all the revenues, every single dollar, has to be used for the benefit of the Iraqi people."
Isn't it nice of the USA to ask?
I think it was brilliant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.