Iraq's seat at the UN table

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 09/23/03 | editorial board

[Pokey78]

A delegation from Iraq's governing council will today attempt to take that country's seat at the United Nations. Objectors will argue that the council is Washington's creature, its 25 members having been appointed by the Coalition Provisional Authority in Baghdad, and that it lacks the legitimacy which only democratic elections can give.

Their contention is true, but at least the council is a step towards representative government in Iraq; a body created for the transition between the fall of Saddam Hussein and the holding of elections under a new constitution. The current Iraqi mission to the UN consists of diplomats appointed under the old dictatorship who can attend meetings but not vote, their country having failed to pay its dues for the past 12 years. It is much better that the council, currently under the presidency of Ahmad Chalabi, should occupy the UN seat rather than the diplomatic flotsam of the previous regime.

Such a change will demonstrate to the world that the Iraqis are beginning to shape their own destiny. The council's acceptance by the Arab League and the presence of Kamel al-Keylani, Iraq's finance minister, at this week's World Bank/IMF meeting in Dubai are steps already taken in that direction.

France would have the Iraqis assume full responsibility for running their country within months and the UN, rather than the United States, act as midwife to this transfer of power. Jacques Chirac is naturally keen that the world body should play a greater role, for thereby French influence, marginalised when America and Britain went to war without Security Council blessing, would be restored.

But the conflicting demands of Shia, Sunni and Kurd in the run-up to a constitutional convention demonstrate the dangers of rushing a complex and delicate process. Over the weekend, Iyad Allawi, a council member, advocated a "gradual, progressive" approach towards full sovereignty.

As for the UN, George W Bush, under domestic pressure to spread the burden of governing Iraq, is seeking a resolution which would give the world body a greater, but not determining role, in exchange for troop contributions from countries such as Turkey and India. On Sunday, the President said the UN could help with writing the constitution and overseeing elections. That, rather than the self-serving French demand for rapid and fundamental change, is the right way ahead.

But in his speech to the General Assembly today Mr Bush must persuade members that failure in Iraq would be a disaster not just for the occupying powers but for the cause of democracy across the world. In so doing, it would help both potential troop contributors and the Iraqis if he gave a clearer idea of when power might be fully transferred.

[Arkady]

The u.n. still hasn't extended membership to Taiwan after decades.
iraq needs the u.n. like we need france....
The u.n. is already to cut-and-run after the 2nd attack against them in iraq. And we're supposed to turn things over to them?

[cwb]

UN on Iraq: "it lacks the legitimacy which only democratic elections can give."

Right...and that's why the UN still recognizes tyrannical dictatorships and fraudulent democracies. It's amazing...they won't recognize this government, but they had no problem recognizing the previous government that was a thugocracy, ruled by murderer. This organization should be disbanded.