UN Won't Help U.S. As Long As "Stooges" Run Iraq Government

by Thalif Deen

Germany, France and Russia, three key members of the UN Security Council, say they are willing to concede U.S. military leadership in Iraq provided Washington relinquishes civilian and political authority to the United Nations and to Iraqis.

"What they are saying," explains an Arab diplomat, "is that Paul Bremer (the highest ranking U.S. civilian administrator in Baghdad) should be answerable to the United Nations and to the Iraqis."

The response from U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell was fast and furious. In an interview with the Arabic television network Al Jazeera on Thursday, Powell summarily rejected any attempts to transfer civilian control to the Iraqis.

"Suggestions that ... all we have do is get up tomorrow morning and find an Iraqi who is passing by and give him the government and say 'you're now in charge and Ambassador Bremer and the American army are leaving,' -- that's not an acceptable solution (to the United States)," he said.

The Iraqi administration is currently in the hands of a governing council whose 25 members -- described by some as "American stooges" -- were handpicked by Bremer and his Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA).

France, Germany and Russia have proposed amendments relating to Iraqi sovereignty to the U.S.-sponsored resolution that calls for the creation of a UN-authorized multinational peacekeeping force in Iraq.

The proposed peacekeeping force is expected, in the long run, to ease the pressure on U.S. troops, who are being killed at an average of about one soldier per day.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has invited foreign ministers from the five veto-wielding permanent members in the Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- to a meeting in Geneva on Saturday to discuss options on the table.

Besides Powell, the other four who will attend the meeting are Dominique de Villepin of France, Jack Straw of Britain, Igor Ivanov of Russia and Li Zhaoxing of China.

But in inviting the 'big five,' Annan has left out the 10 non-permanent members of the Council: Bulgaria, Cameroon, Guinea, Mexico, Syria, Angola, Chile, Germany, Pakistan and Spain.

"The Secretary-General knows who the masters are. He knows that well -- painfully well," Jim Paul of the New York-based Global Policy Forum, told IPS.

Calling for secrecy, Annan has warned members of the Security Council that the ongoing discussions on the draft resolution should take place only "behind closed doors" until they reach an understanding on the resolution, or they are in danger of creating "a sense of division."

Annan has been trying to avoid a replay of the situation just before the war when France openly threatened to veto a U.S.-British resolution justifying a military attack on Iraq.

As a result of the public brawl, the United States refused to put the resolution to a vote and went to war without Security Council authorization.

"So do not expect me to go into too many details," Annan told reporters Monday. He said that an "essential part of the discussions will be to try and establish an Iraqi administration that will be responsible for running its own affairs."

"It is not so much for the United Nations to go in and take over the administration and management of Iraq," he said. "We want to accelerate the establishment of a government and the transfer of authority and to have the Iraqis run their own affairs, as indicated in the (U.S.-sponsored) Security Council resolution."

The United States is seeking to have the resolution adopted before Sep. 23, when President George W. Bush is scheduled to address the UN General Assembly.

With a resolution in hand, Bush is expected to ask visiting Indian Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf for 20,000 to 30,000 of their troops to boost the new multinational force.

Paul said that after talking to several UN delegates he got the impression that even if the Security Council adopts the resolution, "there is not going to be a lot of recruits for the new force."

The additional dilemma, he said, is that while the United States is trying to bring in Turkish troops, the new Iraqi foreign minister has already issued a statement opposing it. "There is already a split between the Iraqis and the U.S. civilian administration," Paul added.

Traditionally, Iraq and Turkey have been at loggerheads over the minority Kurds in Iraq, who continue to have links with Kurds in Turkey demanding a separate nation state.

Paul also said that it was wrong to assume that a UN-authorized force will be welcomed by the Iraqis with open arms.

The bombing of the UN compound should be a clear warning to the United Nations, he said. "Everyone understands that the other military forces -- the Indians, the Pakistanis and the Turks -- are all going to be lumped together with U.S. forces," he added.

Also worrisome is that the resolution will give a UN imprimatur to the U.S. occupation of Iraq, Paul said.

"It is the United Nations that will ultimately suffer by being seen as an instrument of the United States," he added.