Powell on Iraq: US won't budge on key points

In a policy speech, he says US will listen to all comments on a UN resolution as long as they are consistent with its overall goals

WASHINGTON - The United States is willing to adjust its proposed new UN resolution on Iraq to address the concerns of countries like France and Germany, but will not budge on its basic principles, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said yesterday.

Mr Powell said Washington would not back down on the draft resolution's two key points: the authorisation of a US-led multinational force for Iraq and a call for Iraqis to present their own timetable for a return to self-rule.

'Our only goal (is) to allow the Iraqi people to regain sovereignty, but sovereignty based on democracy, sovereignty based on freedom, sovereignty based on peaceful existence with one's neighbours,' he said.

'This has been the President's goal from the very beginning, and this new resolution will move us further along toward that goal,' he said in a speech to students at the George Washington University.

The US proposal has met resistance from UN Security Council members France and Germany, whose leaders have said it does not move fast enough to restore Iraqi self-governance and are wary of any move to 'legitimise' the war they vehemently opposed.

Mr Powell said Washington was willing to listen to Paris and Berlin but could not guarantee that they would be satisfied with the final result.

'There are some of my Security Council colleagues who would like to move faster, some who say: 'Be a little more careful',' he said.

'We will listen to all of the comments that will be coming in, and we will try to adjust and adapt to those comments as long as they are consistent with what I have just described as our overall goal,' he said.

The draft, submitted to Security Council members this week, asks the Iraqi Governing Council, in cooperation with the US-led occupying powers and the United Nations, to provide a timeline for creating a new constitution and holding democratic elections.

'The resolution would also permit the United Nations to play a more comprehensive and active role in the transition back to Iraqi sovereignty,' he said.

On the other international issues, Mr Powell remarked that Washington's relations with Beijing are now more healthy than at any time since President Richard Nixon made his epochal journey to Beijing in 1972.

On the Middle-East, he kept up the steady US drumbeat against the militant Palestinian groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, urging the world at large to isolate them and cut off their finances.

Mr Powell also restated US criticism of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat for frustrating efforts to implement the so-called 'roadmap' for peace with Israel, and said Washington would not back away from the plan despite serious challenges posed to it.

And, he reaffirmed US backing for Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmud Abbas and his attempt to wrest complete control from Arafat of the Palestinian security apparatus in order to rein in groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

'Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad and similar organisations must be isolated,' Mr Powell said in a speech at the George Washington University. -- AFP

The United States is willing to adjust its proposed new UN resolution on Iraq to address the concerns of countries like France and Germany, but will not budge on its basic principles,

Translation: 'All that principle business went out the window several weeks ago- now we're just quibbling over who wears which colour tie'.

Franco/German resistance will bend when it becomes apparent that America's handling of Iraq might bring the -- dictator protecting -- United Nations to an end.

If we are going to give Iraq over to the UN the Iraqis would be better served to take over their own tribal areas. The UN would be ineffective in stopping the bloodshed. The Kurds are pretty well in control in their area. Withdraw and let the Shia and Sunnis work out their differences. The options are limited, a tarbaby has been formed and nobody has an ideal solution. In the First Iraq war, the judgement was made that Iraq would disintegrate if we continued to Baghdad. Hindsight has shown this to be true.

Yes, what does that mean? That France and Germany have won after all? And if so, why?

They've provided no money, no help, and nobody needs them. So why are we licking their toes?

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.