Isolated Bush takes UN helm
Ian Mather
imather@scotlandonsunday.com
scotlandonsunday.com
IRAQ and the consequences of the war will cast a shadow over the US presidency of the United Nations Security Council, which begins this week.
As the world’s only superpower the US should have been ideally positioned to push its own agenda over the coming weeks.
Indeed American officials were at one time touting the prospect that Washington would focus global attention on such popular themes as the need to rid the world of the evils of human trafficking, child slavery and sex tourism, as well as on its own drive for stronger measures to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons, directed at North Korea and Iran.
Instead President George W Bush will find no escape from the growing dilemma facing the Americans over Iraq. And in practice, virtually the entire US diplomatic effort at the UN will be hijacked by Iraq issues as Washington struggles to win agreement on a new UN resolution that it hopes will get it off the hook.
The Americans want a resolution that will give the UN’s blessing to the rebuilding of Iraq and authorise the deployment of a multinational force. This, they hope, will lead other countries to overcome their reluctance to contributing troops and money to restore stability.
The issue is increasingly urgent for Bush, who is starting to become vulnerable over Iraq within the US, with a presidential election just over a year away.
The Democrats are scenting blood with the publication soon of the eagerly awaited report by the Iraq Survey Group, which is expected to say that it has so far found no proof of banned weapons.
Nevertheless, at the United Nations it looks as though the US will succeed in its first objective to obtain its resolution.
Bush spent much of last week in bilateral talks at the UN and at Camp David trying to mend fences with France, Germany, and Russia, which formed the anti-war axis on the Security Council.
He had some success. German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has signalled that Germany will supply trainers for the Iraqi security and police.
There are also the makings of a deal with France. In private talks with Bush, President Jacques Chirac indicated that France would not veto a new UN resolution. Secretary of State Colin Powell pushed the American line closer to the French position and stated that the US was advocating a deadline of six months for Iraqi leaders to produce a new constitution.
With neither Russia, which wants lucrative oil contracts in Iraq, nor China likely to exercise their vetoes, it looks as though the US can expect to make a significant diplomatic advance during its UN presidency.
Yet the resolution itself could be little more than a hollow gesture. What the US really needs are foreign money and foreign troops, and so far it has few firm promises of either.
In a world already suffering ‘donor fatigue’ for causes ranging from Aids to Afghanistan, governments are unlikely to give generously or to send troops if they sense that the US wants to rebuild Iraq in its own interests, diplomats say.
"The president wants the international help in the domestic political context of today," said Andrew Bacevich, director of the Centre for International Relations at Boston University, "But I don’t see the Europeans helping out there. It’s more important to them to bring the US to heel."
On Thursday an international coordination committee will meet in Madrid to put the final touches to an Iraq donors’ conference due to be held there on October 23. Around 70 governments have pledged to attend the full conference, which will establish an Iraqi Trust Fund to be administered by the World Bank.
The Bank estimates that $50-$75bn will be needed over four to five years. The US would like foreign donors to come up with $30bn to $40bn of this. But so far, non-US sources account for barely $1.5bn.
The position on troops is equally gloomy from the US viewpoint. Ideally, it wants another division of 15,000 troops, and soon after that another 13,000 so that it can bring some of its own 150,000 troops home.
Washington has abandoned hope of persuading Germany and France to join Britain in contributing to an international force. Russia is pleading poverty.
So the US is pinning its hopes on four countries: Pakistan, India, Bangladesh and Turkey, to send substantial numbers of troops, but each has placed all but insurmountable conditions on military support, or is facing strong domestic opposition to sending troops.
Ironically, the most lethal resistance to a new UN resolution could come not from any of the governments that opposed the war, but from the UN itself.
The UN’s role would be vital in writing the new constitution, holding local meetings to explain the process, and organising a referendum and finally elections for a new government.
But following two bombings against the UN compound in Baghdad that have killed nearly two dozen people Secretary-General Kofi Annan has ordered the "temporary" redeployment of non-Iraqi staff to Jordan.
In the absence of the UN on the ground any resolution giving the international organisation an enhanced role would be meaningless.
COST OF RECONSTRUCTION
President Bush has asked Congress for $20.304bn for Iraq.
The breakdown is as follows:
•Electricity generating capacity, transmission and distribution - $5.675bn
•Security, including training and equipping border enforcement, police, fire, and customs personnel, setting up the New Iraqi Army and Civil Defence Corps; also developing civil society and the justice sector - $5.136bn
•Oil industry infrastructure - $2.1bn
•Public works, including access to safe drinking water and sanitation - $3.71bn
•Water resources and restoration of marshlands - $875m
•Transport and telecommunications, including three airports, the port at Umm Qasr, and reconstruction of the railways - $835m
•Housing, and repair and reconstruction of public buildings, roads and bridges - $470m
•Hospitals, including the construction of a new paediatric hospital, refurbishment of hospitals and clinics, and the replacement of medical equipment - $850m
•Private sector development, including the establishment of an American-Iraqi Enterprise Fund, and expanded on-the-job training - $353m
•Assistance to refugees and internally displaced persons, development of local government, funding of a property claims tribunal, and other human rights - $300m |
