Global Policy Forum

By Felicity Barringer

The United States, using the bombing of the United Nations' compound in Baghdad on Tuesday as a rallying cry, is trying to build support for a new Security Council resolution to encourage former opponents of the war in Iraq to contribute military and financial aid to the reconstruction effort.

But, as Secretary of State Colin F. Powell made clear after meeting here today with the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Annan, the coalition would continue to command all military forces in Iraq. He gave no indication that the coalition would cede any of its political and economic authority, though he added that the United Nations' future role ``can be discussed in the course of our negotiations on a resolution."

Until now, major nations like France, Germany and Russia, and potential contributors of troops, like India, Pakistan and Turkey, have balked at putting their forces in Iraq without a United Nations resolution specifically backing such a deployment.

The suggestion of a new resolution, with no change in the coalition's control of all aspects of Iraq's development, was immediately met with an icy response from the deputy French ambassador, Michel Duclos.

After the Security Council heard reports from the United States and Britain on the overall situation in Iraq, Mr. Duclos said the economic and political reconstruction of Iraq would not succeed if the coalition insisted on sole control of the process.

``Sharing the burden and responsibility in a world of equal and sovereign nations also means sharing information and authority," Mr. Duclos said. While condemning the terrorist attack, he asked rhetorically, ``Would we be in this state if there had been set up at the outset a genuine international partnership?" After his meeting with Mr. Powell, Mr. Annan told reporters, ``There are many who were against the war who are now coming together to help stabilize Iraq, and I think the stability of Iraq should be in everyone's interest."

It was clear from Mr. Annan's public remarks and from what one official said about the secretary general's private conference with Mr. Powell that he wants to avoid another bitter fight over Iraq, which would do nothing to enhance the security of United Nations personnel in Iraq and would further sideline the organization.

During his meeting with Mr. Powell, Mr. Annan emphasized the need to establish a framework that would unite the council's five permanent members before presenting any resolution to reframe the United Nations' now ambiguous mandate in Iraq. And afterward, while Mr. Annan said that ``we have no intention of recommending U.N. blue helmets" - shorthand for a United Nations peacekeeping force - he did raise the possibility of ``a multinational force that oversees security arrangements."

As the confirmed death toll in the United Nations bombing rose to 23 today, the question of security in Iraq became increasingly acute. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld made it clear this week that he saw no need to add troops, saying, ``At the moment, the conclusion of the responsible military officials is that the force levels are where they should be."

In Iraq, there are 139,000 American troops and 21,700 troops from other countries, half of those from Britain. Mr. Powell said today that in addition to Britain 29 nations had contributed to the force. Nations deciding to contribute troops, Mr. Powell said, ``want them to be under solid, responsible, competent military leadership of the kind that is being provided by the coalition."

Some experts say it is unrealistic to expect Iraq to be secured with troops at current levels. A major debate flared on this point in May, when Gen. Eric K. Shinseki, the Army chief of staff at the time, said hundreds of thousands of troops would be needed to secure Iraq after the war.

Beyond the military question, the political and economic reconstruction of Iraq remains in its infancy, but it is clear that the United States is trying to push the 25-member Iraqi Governing Council into a more active role. In his report on the situation in Iraq, the United States envoy, John D. Negroponte, said, ``Thirty years of unbridled tyranny have scarred and stunted the Iraqi body politic."

He added, ``It is now up to the Governing Council to guide the country through the sequence of events - naming ministers for an interim government, drafting a constitution, holding elections - that will lead to an internationally recognized, representative government." But Mr. Duclos, in his remarks, made it clear that he believed that the promises of the first postwar resolution on Iraq remained unfulfilled, particularly the establishment of an international monitoring board to oversee the coalition's control of Iraq's oil revenues.

And speaking after the presentations of Mr. Negroponte and the British envoy, Emyr Jones Parry, representatives of several countries, particularly Pakistan, alluded to conditions that might allow for their support of a new resolution - specifically a timetable for the coalition forces' withdrawal. After the meeting, the Pakistani envoy, Munir Akram, said his country would be reluctant to provide forces unless it was clear that they were wanted by the Iraqi people.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.