PDA

View Full Version : UN: No Country Has Offered to Protect Us in Iraq



BlackRain
07-22-2004, 10:58 AM
Annan: U.N. Staff in Iraq Is Unprotected

Thursday July 22, 2004 2:01 AM

By EDITH M. LEDERER

Associated Press Writer

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Six weeks after the U.N. Security Council authorized a separate force to protect U.N. staff in Iraq, Secretary-General Kofi Annan said Wednesday that the world body has not received a single firm commitment of troops.

Annan said if the 191 U.N. member states want the United Nations to play a major role in helping Iraq prepare for elections, draft a constitution, and rebuild the country they must ensure adequate security for U.N. personnel.

``Without that security, we cannot really deploy in any sizeable number,'' he said.

Security is an especially sensitive issue as the first anniversary of the Aug. 19, 2003, bombing of U.N. headquarters in Baghdad approaches. That blast killed 22 people, including top U.N. envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello.

It was followed by a second bombing, and after an upsurge in attacks elsewhere in Iraq, Annan ordered all U.N. international staff to leave the country in October. He has sent his special adviser, Lakhdar Brahimi, and U.N. election chief Carina Perelli to Iraq on several occasions - but there is still no permanent U.N. mission in Baghdad.

That will soon change following Annan's announcement last week that the new U.N. envoy to Iraq, Ashraf Jehangir Qazi, who has been Pakistan's ambassador to the United States, will be based in Baghdad with a small team.

He is expected to arrive in Baghdad in late July or early August, but the U.S.-led multinational force will have to provide protection because the separate brigade of about 4,000 troops that was envisioned to protect U.N. staff and facilities still exists only on paper.

``We have about three or four countries that have indicated some interest,'' Annan told a news conference. ``I don't think any of them has come up with the size of force it is prepared to deploy; consultations and discussions are going on.''

U.N. diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, have identified Nepal and Georgia as two possible troop contributors.

The secretary-general said he had spoken to some leaders ``who seemed interested but had certain conditions,'' including Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf.

He indicated that Pakistan ``would be prepared to contribute if the request were to come from the Iraqi interim government, and if there were other Islamic troops on the ground, because they would not want to be the only Islamic force on the ground,'' Annan said.

Discussions are taking place with other Islamic countries about deploying troops to the region.

Some diplomats have expressed particular dismay that European countries, which have been pressing the United Nations to get more involved in Iraq, appear unwilling to provide the world body the protection it needs.

jmatucd
07-22-2004, 01:40 PM
How about 130,000 US troops?

This is beyond me

BlackRain
07-22-2004, 02:12 PM
I believe the UN has its own protective forces already.

However, I believe that the current coalition forces don't want the added responsiblity of protecting the UN.

The US was blamed last time for the lax security that resulted in the bombing in the UN compound in Iraq.

However, it turned out that the UN turned down security offers from the UN and now there are reports the UN bombing was an inside job. The UN failed to properly screen their employees in Iraq who had connections to Saddam's regime.

usa320
07-22-2004, 02:22 PM
Indeed...

Last time the US forces tried guarding the UN compound in Baghdad, the UN bitched. So we pulled out. They got bombed. They blamed us for not guarding them.

:cantbeli:

**** the UN.