U.S. Opposes Full U.N. Control in Iraq

[Seraphim]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030912/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq_83

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20030912/capt.1063403084.iraq_xrg101.jpg


American soldier Maj. Bryan Luke of Mobile, Ala., 2nd in command of 1st Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry keeps at the ready during a night patrol in Tikrit, Iraq (news - web sites), Friday, Sept. 12, 2003. Patrols are an ongoing exercise in Iraq as a show of force to attempt to reduce the activities of possible Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) loyalists. (AP Photo/Rob Griffith)


By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON - Heading for talks with reluctant allies, Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) says the United States won't turn over all authority in Iraq (news - web sites) to the United Nations (news - web sites).


"The U.N. isn't ready to handle it," Powell told ARD, a German television station, in an interview released Friday as he flew to Geneva for the talks.


"We want to work with the U.N., but we can't simply cede all responsibility and authority to the U.N.," he said in advance of meetings Saturday with British, French, Russian and Chinese foreign ministers and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites).


The United States, hoping its allies will provide troops and money in the face of continued attacks and mounting costs in Iraq, has proposed a U.N. Security Council resolution creating a multinational force under a unified U.N. command with an American commander.


French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, in an article published Friday in the newspaper Le Monde, said a provisional Iraqi government should be set up in a month and a draft constitution should be ready by the end of the year.


State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said in response that "the question of the time-scale first and foremost is for the Iraqis to answer. It's their country. We want to see them take sovereignty over that country as quickly as possible."


Powell, in an interview with France's TV2 that was taped Thursday and released Friday, said France keeps saying sovereignty should be given back to the Iraqi people.


"My answer to that is: 'Yes, as soon as we can. But to whom do we give it? We have to create a government. We have to create a parliament. We have to put in place a constitution after it's been written. We have to have elections,'" Powell said.


He said there obviously would be spirited discussion in Geneva, but "France is not an enemy. France is a friend and an ally."


Still, Powell said, the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq have invested a great deal of political capital, financial resources and the lives of young men and women. "We can't be expected to suddenly just step aside," he said.


Chances of nailing down an agreement this weekend in Geneva and at the United Nations in New York appear slim.


But Powell said, "I don't think there is a need to have a fight about this."


"Clearly the U.N. has a vital role to play," Powell said. "We've said this from the very beginning. And we should discuss and describe in the resolution what that role is."


Asked if the United Nations should play a leading role, Powell replied: "I said vital. I don't know what leading means."


Powell said Wednesday in an interview with Al-Jazeera, the Arab satellite network financed by Qatar, that Iraq would face "total chaos" if the United States surrendered to demands for a hasty U.S. transfer of authority to Iraqi control.


Powell also said it was not practical at present for the United States to transfer control to the United Nations.


"We want to transfer sovereignty for Iraq from the Coalition Provisional Authority to the Iraqis as fast as we can, but we must do it in a responsible way," Powell said.

[Seiyuuki]

Still, Powell said, the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq have invested a great deal of political capital, financial resources and the lives of young men and women. "We can't be expected to suddenly just step aside," he said.

...And good point.

[James]

When the United States entered World War One in 1917, the French and British wanted (at best) American soldiers to be shipped across the pond to serve in their own units, but they were willing to accept whole battalions and regiments. This was strongly resisted by the U.S., and, with the exception of a few cases, the U.S. Army fought as an independent orginization until the war ended.

I find this bit of history interesting, because the U.S. is now asking other countries to supply troops and other means of support, but with an American in charge.

Perhaps it would have been helpful if we hadn't given the UN the finger back in February and March. It might be easier to get support now...

[Seiyuuki]

Ugh...the US got stuck with the French Chauchet (or some other spelling) in World War 1, that was bad and punishing enough.

It's not entirely American in charge. As far as thing are in Iraq, it is to my understanding, several countries are in charge of differing sectors of Iraq...like the British or the Spanish are commanding troops from several other nations in southern or northern or somewhere in the country.

[FallenAngel]

James, what the US wants is very similiar to the situation in Europe during WWII. British, Canadia, Free French, Polish, Czech, etc. forces would fight in their own respective units with an "supreme commander" which would be an American (just like Eisenhower). They are not suggesting that NATO/ UN forces mix in US brigades, but serve alongside them.

There are currently two multi-national divisions in Iraq under Polish and British commands.

[FuzziWuzzi]

Powell and Rice , always use the analogy :

"Look at Timor , Australia was the majority therefore Australia was put in charge of the interfet peacekeepers."

That's true, but regardless it wasn't long before we handed command to the U.N, as was the original game plan ;
and if I recall as for arm twisting, we almost had to pull the US's out of it's socket before they even considered to commit.
[*postnote* we also got to keep the girl, errum... i mean Timor Gap gas contracts hehe] p-)