The UN in Iraq

The US occupation of Iraq, with its token participation of forces from other countries, is turning from a precarious undertaking to an ongoing disaster. The tragic bombing of the UN complex, and the mosque in Najaf, the sabotage of the oil pipelines, the daily killing of soldiers, and more, are producing a crisis for both Bush’s policy and the Iraqi people. <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

Postwar Iraq is becoming a magnet for terrorists. The chaos continues to feed a preexisting antagonism to the US as a western power occupying Arab land. These events demonstrate the limits of power, especially when used without worldwide support. The bombing of the UN complex, resulting in the death of civilian workers, including the UN’s chief representative in Iraq, Sergio de Mello, was a tragic event that forebodes worse to come. Mello exhibited the best qualities of an international civil servant. He was often spoken of as a successor to Kofi Annan.

In many places UN workers are in the front line. Over 250 have died on the job since 1992. But the Baghdad bombing was the worst blow yet. The UN was not able to provide its own security. Relying on US forces for security would only have reinforced the impression that the UN is a tool of American power.

The US now seeks international help. This will not materialize until it relinquishes its Lone Ranger approach. Ironically, recent events are strengthening the pivotal role of the UN as the only institution providing legitimacy in the world’s eyes. A possible solution could be a strong political role for the UN, and a strong multilaterally sponsored force including participation by regional Muslim countries under a UN mandate. These forces must be impartial enough to be respected by the local population. Terrorist groups will continue to resist but the best hope for peace and reconstruction is the desire of ordinary Iraqis to control their own destiny and resume a normal life. This will require great political skill and money. Very little has been forthcoming.

In a recent press conference Secretary-General Kofi Annan called for a rethinking of the international institutions which did not function well during the Iraqi debate. He urged world leaders attending the usual September General Assembly meeting to discuss the structure of the Security Council as well as the rules for preventive action or war. Who decides? Under what circumstances? When is humanitarian intervention desirable? Underlying these difficult issues is a fundamental problem for the world body to resolve. How is it possible to balance differing national interests, and every country’s desire for sovereignty, with the overriding demand for collective action? In the meantime, in Iraq, the situation worsens.

Sylvain and Phyllis Ehrenfeld