Posted on 08/21/2003 7:36:30 PM PDT by Brian S
Aug. 21 — By Evelyn Leopold
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - Secretary of State Colin Powell launched a fresh drive on Thursday to get more nations to send troops to Iraq but made clear the United States would not cede any control of the country.
However, the push for a new Security Council resolution that would draw more troops, police or financial assistance met with opposition from France, Russia and Germany, who said the United Nations should be given a larger role in Iraq's future and asked for a timetable to end the occupation.
"To share the burden and the responsibilities in a world of equal and sovereign nations, also means sharing information and authority," Michel Duclos, France's charge d'affairs, told the Security Council after Powell met privately Secretary-General Kofi Annan.
"This political transition will have a greater chance of success if it is guided by the Iraqis themselves with the assistance not of the occupation forces but of the international community as a whole," he said.
All three nations opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq and none are expected to volunteer troops for Iraq, regardless of the resolution's wording.
Powell spoke to Annan on a range of issues, dominated by the bombing attack that demolished U.N. headquarters in Iraq on Tuesday, killing 24 people and injuring dozens more in an unprecedented attack on U.N. civilians and relief workers.
Among the dead were Brazilian Sergio Vieira de Mello, the head of mission, Nadia Younes of Egypt, his chief of staff.
One purpose of a Security Council mandate would be to get Muslim troops into Iraq, from Turkey, Pakistan and Middle Eastern countries, as well as from India. All have refused to send soldiers without U.N. authorization.
British officials told reporters potential large troop contributors would be asked their views on language in a resolution that would meet their political needs.
NEW LANGUAGE, NEW RESOLUTION
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, visiting the United Nations, told the BBC that troop contributors who wanted a strengthened mandate should "tell us what it is you think you need and then let us see whether we can accommodate that by new language and a new resolution." Straw sees Annan on Friday.
Powell said he directed U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte to negotiate with council members on a resolution but no text has been submitted. "We're looking forward to language that might call on member states to do more," Powell told reporters.
Powell said the force was already international as was comprised of some 22,000 troops from dozens of nations in addition to the 150,000 U.S. soldiers. But of the 22,000 troops, some 11,000 come from staunch ally Britain.
He said any nation sending troops needed them to be under competent leadership "of the kind that is provided by the coalition." British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry agreed, saying that in any operation "one of the basic things you need is one unitary command."
But he left open the possibility that other methods could be explored, such as the three separate commanders under a U.S. umbrella in Afghanistan. Whether or not there is some other way "is a question that will need to be addressed," he said.
Powell's case was not helped by statements from the Pentagon in Washington. Army Gen. John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, said on Thursday there was no need to increase troop strength in Iraq. "Clearly there is a downside to having too many troops there," Abizaid said.
Annan urged countries to support the effort to restore peace in Iraq. But he said that it would "take work" to reach consensus on a resolution that would satisfy everyone.
Smell of blood in water. Hope for strategery, here: signs of weakness?
I never thought of that.
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.