Smeagol-Gollum
27-04-2004, 10:50
The Bush Administration is preparing a resolution for the United Nations to endorse its plan to transfer power in Iraq, but a proposal that guarantees legal protection for foreign troops may face a tough time. Letting the US make the final judgements on Saddam Hussein's weapons programs also faces opposition.
The range of powers to be handed to an Iraqi provisional government on June 30 could also trigger debate, UN and US officials said. Security Council envoys are concerned that the resolution will give only partial sovereignty to Iraq, leaving ultimate power in the hands of the US and its allies.
Russia, China, Pakistan and other council members insist that the transfer of power mark a real end to US control and that the UN be given wider powers - more than the UN appears prepared to assume.
"The main thing is to give back the central role to the United Nations," said China's UN ambassador, Wang Guangya. "The occupation ends on June 30, but . . . there will still be a continuation of foreign occupation."
One goal of the resolution is to rally international support behind the new provisional government, which is still being negotiated by US and UN officials, as well as ease international friction over the US-led invasion.
"We are working on such a resolution, and I'm confident we'll be able to obtain such a resolution," the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, said.
Once the shape of the interim government is settled, negotiations will begin on a resolution. US officials say they have identified the main provisions - and three stumbling blocks. The first involves the legal authority of US-led foreign forces to continue operations in Iraq.
The US and Britain say foreign forces were given legal cover by a previous UN resolution, but their allies are pressing for further UN approval to assuage domestic public opinion. So the US intends to seek UN approval for a multinational force in Iraq.
The second issue is embracing a new Iraqi provisional government and the 18-month transition that will include writing a new constitution and at least two elections. The UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, has been holding talks about a caretaker government until elections in January 2005.
US officials have said the transitional government would have limited powers, with no authority to write laws and no control over US military forces still in Iraq.
The third issue is deciding whether UN or US teams will write the final report on Iraq's weaponry. The US wants a resolution that lets its Iraq survey group draw final conclusions about Saddam's military capabilities. But Russia's acting UN ambassador, Gennady Gatilov, said this should be left to the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission.
The US State Department is pushing for a resolution to pass within about three weeks, a second US official said.
Meanwhile, US forces entered Najaf to protect Spanish troops as they prepare to withdraw. The operation was not an offensive, a US military spokesman said, with most US troops awaiting orders to enter the city where radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and his militia remain.
Also, Britain is talking with coalition partners about its response to the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. Media reports suggested that up to 2000 more British troops could be sent.
SOURCE.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/26/1082831497184.html
COMMENT
Who can still remember when Colin Powell lectured the UN about its failing in policing the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, and offered "proof" of their existence.
And when the US said it was fine to go to war without UN support.
Makes them look rather foolish right now, going back to the UN like errant schoolboys having been caught raiding the cookie jar, and telling fibs about it.
The range of powers to be handed to an Iraqi provisional government on June 30 could also trigger debate, UN and US officials said. Security Council envoys are concerned that the resolution will give only partial sovereignty to Iraq, leaving ultimate power in the hands of the US and its allies.
Russia, China, Pakistan and other council members insist that the transfer of power mark a real end to US control and that the UN be given wider powers - more than the UN appears prepared to assume.
"The main thing is to give back the central role to the United Nations," said China's UN ambassador, Wang Guangya. "The occupation ends on June 30, but . . . there will still be a continuation of foreign occupation."
One goal of the resolution is to rally international support behind the new provisional government, which is still being negotiated by US and UN officials, as well as ease international friction over the US-led invasion.
"We are working on such a resolution, and I'm confident we'll be able to obtain such a resolution," the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, said.
Once the shape of the interim government is settled, negotiations will begin on a resolution. US officials say they have identified the main provisions - and three stumbling blocks. The first involves the legal authority of US-led foreign forces to continue operations in Iraq.
The US and Britain say foreign forces were given legal cover by a previous UN resolution, but their allies are pressing for further UN approval to assuage domestic public opinion. So the US intends to seek UN approval for a multinational force in Iraq.
The second issue is embracing a new Iraqi provisional government and the 18-month transition that will include writing a new constitution and at least two elections. The UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, has been holding talks about a caretaker government until elections in January 2005.
US officials have said the transitional government would have limited powers, with no authority to write laws and no control over US military forces still in Iraq.
The third issue is deciding whether UN or US teams will write the final report on Iraq's weaponry. The US wants a resolution that lets its Iraq survey group draw final conclusions about Saddam's military capabilities. But Russia's acting UN ambassador, Gennady Gatilov, said this should be left to the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission.
The US State Department is pushing for a resolution to pass within about three weeks, a second US official said.
Meanwhile, US forces entered Najaf to protect Spanish troops as they prepare to withdraw. The operation was not an offensive, a US military spokesman said, with most US troops awaiting orders to enter the city where radical cleric Moqtada al-Sadr and his militia remain.
Also, Britain is talking with coalition partners about its response to the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. Media reports suggested that up to 2000 more British troops could be sent.
SOURCE.
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/04/26/1082831497184.html
COMMENT
Who can still remember when Colin Powell lectured the UN about its failing in policing the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction, and offered "proof" of their existence.
And when the US said it was fine to go to war without UN support.
Makes them look rather foolish right now, going back to the UN like errant schoolboys having been caught raiding the cookie jar, and telling fibs about it.