Posted on 05/22/2003 8:07:28 AM PDT by Valin
UNITED NATIONS - In a victory for the United States, the U.N. Security Council overwhelmingly approved a resolution Thursday giving the United Nations' backing to the U.S.-led administration of Iraq and lifting economic sanctions. The resolution passed by a 14-0 vote, with Syria - the only Arab nation on the council - absent.
John Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador, said that after more than a decade of being frozen out of the world economy by sanctions against Saddam Hussein's regime, "it is time for the Iraqi people to benefit from their natural resources," a reference to the country's vast oil wealth.
The final resolution represented a compromise, after France and Russia pushed for a stronger role for the United Nations. But it left the underlying goal of the United States and its allies intact: Washington and London, as occupying powers, remain firmly in control of Iraq and its oil wealth "until an internationally recognized, representative government is established." With the immediate lifting of sanctions, oil exports are expected to quickly resume, said Pakistan's U.N. Ambassador Munir Akram and other council diplomats. There are 8 million barrels of Iraqi oil in storage points at the Turkish port of Ceyhan, one of Iraq's two export terminals, that can be sold immediately, diplomats said.
Ahead of the Thursday morning session, the three staunchest opponents of the U.S.-led war on Iraq - France, Russia and Germany - announced they would back the resolution. That left Syria's vote the only one in doubt. Secretary of State Colin Powell had expressed hope for a unanimous 15-0 vote_ but Syria didn't show up for the vote. The near-unanimous approval for the resolution marks a turnaround for the council, whose unity was shattered over the war. In an acrimonious debate earlier this year, Russia, France and Germany succeeded in blocking a U.S.-backed resolution seeking authorization to attack Iraq.
Council members had made clear they didn't want another debacle over a postwar resolution. In the two weeks since the United States introduced it, the text of the resolution saw more than 90 changes. The final version gives the United Nations a stronger role in establishing a democratic government than initially envisioned, and the stature of a U.N. special representative in Iraq is increased. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who attended the council meeting, has promised to quickly appoint a representative, and speculation centered on U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Vieira de Mello, who has Washington's support.
The world body did not get the lead role that France, Russia and Germany would have liked. France, which had led opposition to the U.S. war in Iraq, was concerned that the resolution would give the United States too much power, and French Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere noted the resolution "is not perfect." "We believe it now provides a credible framework in which the international community can lend support to the Iraqi people," the ambassador said.
French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, standing beside his German and Russian counterparts in Paris, said late Wednesday that the three countries decided to vote for the postwar resolution because it "opens the road" for a central U.N. role. He said the three nations had chosen "the path of unity of the international community." The text "does not go as far as we had hoped" but "the United Nations is back in the game," he said. "We are convinced that the U.N. will tomorrow be the focus for international action, due to its legitimacy, experience and capabilities."
Many council members had complained the resolution set no end to the U.S. and British occupation of Iraq and gave the victorious allies far more power than do international conventions dealing with occupying forces. Many also wanted the council to have a significant role in monitoring reconstruction. Negroponte insisted the United States would not accept any time limits on how long it could administer Iraq - a response to a French and German suggestion that it be for one year and not open-ended.
In a key concession, however, the United States agreed to let the Security Council "review the implementation of this resolution within 12 months of adoption and to consider further steps that might be necessary." The previous texts did not call for any U.N. review of the postwar Iraq operation. Hinting at another concession to Russia and other council members, Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said in a BBC interview late Wednesday that the coalition sees "a role for the U.N. inspectors ... in confirming that Iraq is free of any threat in the area of weapons of mass destruction."
Sanctions imposed on Saddam's regime after its invasion of Kuwait in 1990 technically cannot be lifted until U.N. weapons inspectors declare it free of weapons of mass destruction. But the United States has refused to allow them to return. The resolution lifts economic sanctions without certification from U.N. inspectors, but it reaffirms "that Iraq must meet its disarmament obligations" and says the council will discuss the mandates of the U.N. inspectors later. It gives no time frame.
The Bush administration said this week that nuclear inspectors would be allowed to jointly inspect the looted nuclear research center at Tuwaitha.
Nearly half the seven-page resolution deal with arrangements to phase out the U.N. oil-for-food humanitarian program over the next six months and transfer control of Iraq's oil revenue from the United Nations to the United States and Britain. During the phase-out period, Annan will go through $10 billion worth of contracts approved and funded under the program and decide whether they are needed by the Iraqi people. Many of these contracts are with Russian companies.
The occupying powers, meanwhile, will take charge of a new Iraqi Development Fund, which will have an international advisory and monitoring board that de Villepin said would provide "transparency." The resolution grants immunity from lawsuits involving oil and natural gas until an internationally recognized government is in place and Iraq's $400 billion debt is restructured.
My guess is that you haven't been correct about any of your predictions about this war so far. Maybe if you pray harder you will get your wish about a mogadeshi.
And I am sure that is why we did it, but what would we have done if they had not lifted the sanctions? I suspect we would have just continued what we are doing and followed our plan. That would have led to a standoff between us and the UN which the UN couldn't win. We don't really want that either because of the desire of France and Russia (Germany is just along for the ride after Schroeder was reelected) to isolate us in the world community. (They are really isolating themselves) This UN action was just a nicety to prevent problems for both of us and the UN took it because that was the only way to get a piece of the action and remain semi-relevant. Russia and France went along because they couldn't win either.
another Reuters article - Evelyn Leopold
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to end 13-year-old sanctions on Iraq (news - web sites) and gave the United States and Britain extraordinary powers to run the country and its lucrative oil industry.
Despite misgivings by many council members, the 14-0 vote was a victory for the Bush administration, which made some last-minute concessions that opened the door to an independent, albeit limited U.N. role and the possibility of U.N. weapons inspectors returning to post-war Iraq.
The only opposition came from Syria, Iraq's neighbor and the sole Arab member of the 15-nation Security Council. Syria left its seat empty and did not cast a vote.
"The lifting of sanctions marks a momentous event for the people of Iraq," U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte told the council after the vote. "It is time for the Iraqi people to benefit from their natural resources."
And France, Germany, China, Russia and others who had opposed the U.S.-led war that ousted Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)'s government all voted "yes" but said the resolution was less than perfect.
"The war that we did not want, and the majority of the council did not want, has taken place," Germany's U.N. ambassador, Gunter Pleuger, told reporters. "
"We cannot undo history. We are now in a situation where we have to take action for the sake of the Iraqi people," Pleuger said.
Britain, a staunch U.S. supporter, made clear that unlike Washington, it wanted the return of U.N. arms inspectors.
Without U.N. action to lift the sanctions the United States would have been in a legal no man's land, with many firms unwilling to engage in trade with Iraq.
OIL FLOWS TO RESUME
Some 8.3 million barrels of Iraqi oil stored at the Turkish port of Ceyhan can now be exported. "The oil is ready to flow. The tanks are full," one council diplomat said. "I think you will find it will move quite quickly."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites) said he would name a special representative for Iraq shortly. The United States has signaled it prefers Sergio Vieira de Mello, currently the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights.
"Whatever differences there have been in the recent past, we now have a new basis on which to work. And we must all work very hard, keeping the interests of Iraqis at the forefront of all our efforts," Annan told the Security Council.
The final compromise in the seven-page resolution was an agreement by Washington for a Security Council review within 12 months on the implementation of the resolution. But the measure does not need to be renewed and stays in effect until an internationally recognized Iraqi government is established.
French Ambassador Jean-Marc de la Sabliere said the resolution, while not "perfect," provided "a credible framework within which the international community will be able to lend support for the Iraqi people."
The U.N. sanctions were imposed after Iraq's 1990 invasion of Kuwait. But after Saddam's fall, the United States argued there was no reason to continue the trade and financial embargoes.
The resolution would give the United States and Britain broad powers to run Iraq and sell its oil to fund reconstruction. It would also protect Iraq against lawsuits or attachments of its oil revenues until a permanent Iraqi government is established.
Do you remember Afghanistan under the Taliban? Can't get much more strict than that. They are now a functioning democracy. Sure they are having trouble, look how far they had to go. There are still Islamists trying to overthrow that democracy but so far they haven't. The people of Afghanistan seem to like it. It is only the nuts you describe who hate it. Democracy can work in Islamic countries.
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.