The Council on Foreign Relations is very closely involved in American foreign policy decisions in Iraq. They are not, as I've said before, as dependent on the UN as they used to be. I believe they have such complete control now of the much more powerful US Government the UN is now their second choice for implementing their policies. The CFR is waiting to see how severe the public outcry is over the $87 billion for the Iraq campaign. The CFR uses American taxpayer dollars to keep building their New World Order and bring a rouge nation into their fold with American might.
U.S. May Drop Security Council Resolution on Iraq
By REUTERS
Published: October 7, 2000
UNITED NATIONS, Oct 7 (Reuters) - Despite divisions in the 15-member U.N. Security Council, U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte on Tuesday ruled out making any substantial changes to the Bush administration's draft resolution on Iraq.
Consequently, council diplomats said the United States had to decide soon whether to drop the effort entirely or push for a split vote in the council that might limit its impact.
Easy passage of the resolution, aimed a broadening military and financial support, was assured until Secretary-General Kofi Annan last week turned down U.N. political participation unless Iraqi sovereignty was accelerated.
At a Security Council session on Monday, most members wanted the resolution to deal with some of Annan's suggestions but Negroponte virtually excluded this.
"What I told the council members was that if in the coming days we put forward a resolution with an idea to putting it to an early vote, that they shouldn't expect any significant or radical departures from the resolution they have before them," Negroponte told a news conference.
"It's certainly our intent at this moment to press ahead with the resolution," he added.
Among the 15 council members, France, Russia, Germany, China and Syria were expected to abstain while only Britain, Spain and Bulgaria were sure votes, diplomats said.
The other six council members, Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, expressed misgivings but might support the resolution under U.S. cajoling, the envoys said.
A minimum of nine positive votes are needed to adopt a resolution but a divided council could minimize its impact.
The resolution calls for the United Nations to help with a constitution and set up elections, tasks which Annan opposes as long as the occupation continues. He also has few staff willing to return to Iraq following the Aug. 19 bombing of U.N. offices in Baghdad that killed 22 people.
But Negroponte said the current hesitation on the part of U.N. officials might not be the case in the future.
The draft resolution would transform the current military operation into a U.N.-authorized multinational force to give political cover to countries hesitating to bolster the occupation. Turkey, however, will send troops without the U.N. imprimatur.
DEPENDS ON THE $87 BILLION
Lee Feinstein, acting director of the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, said the United States would continue organizing troops bilaterally and did not expect major contributions at the Madrid meeting.
But he said attitudes towards a U.N. resolution would depend on the degree of domestic political pressure on the U.S. Congress about the administration's $87 billion request for Iraq. If the request came under severe threat then strategy towards the U.N. might be more conciliatory.
"The administration could then plausibly argue that they are seeking to broaden the burden," Feinstein said in a telephone interview. "But until and unless that happens, there will be a lukewarm approach to the United Nations."
The United States wants to continue the occupation, with duties transferred to Iraqis gradually, until a constitution is written and elections are held, which could take two years.
In contrast, Russia's foreign minister Igor Ivanov said in Moscow on Tuesday that the resolution did not meet Moscow's expectations. "Now that there is no longer a dictator in Iraq, there is no reason to not give back to the Iraqi people the right to decide their destiny," he said.
Annan told council members last Thursday he did not want to risk more lives for a marginal political role in Iraq as in the U.S.-drafted resolution.
He outlined a rival blueprint, almost identical to one proposed by France and Germany, that would transfer sovereignty to a provisional government within three to five months, after which work would begin on a constitution and elections.
nytimes.com |
