| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| UN to see revised Iraq draft |
| 2004-06-07 |
| Iraq and the United States are attempting to clear the way for passage of a new U.N. resolution by devising a plan for military partnership when the U.S.-led occupation ends officially on June 30. U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte, who hopes for a vote in the 15-nation Security Council on Tuesday, said that a revised draft, the fourth in two weeks, would be introduced on Monday. The one hitch that might prevent quick adoption of the U.S.-British measure on Baghdad’s future is a proposed amendment from France that would make explicit a virtual Iraqi veto over major U.S.-led military operations. But diplomats said it was doubtful Washington would agree to the language France had suggested. The control of the 160,000 U.S.-led troops was the most contentious issue in the resolution, which gives international endorsement to the interim government and authorizes a multinational force under American command. The Security Council at a special session on Sunday received separate letters from U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and Iraq’s new prime minister, Iyad Allawi. "We’re confident that they do the trick," said Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry of Britain. He said his government understood that "the policy on sensitive offensive operations will require the assent" of a new Iraqi ministerial committee. But the letters do not state that explicitly, prompting France, backed in part by China, Germany, Algeria and Chile, to request the resolution make clear Iraq can block a major offensive U.S. military campaign, such as the American assault on Falluja, which Iraqis opposed. In his letter, Allawi said he would chair a Ministerial Committee for National Security that would set the framework for security operations and would include American commanders to devise "mechanisms of coordination and cooperation." He said this group needed to "reach agreement of the full range of fundamental security and policy issues, including policy on sensitive offensive operations." Powell made similar statements, saying the U.S. command would try to reach agreement on security and policy issues in "partnership" with Iraq. He said the foreign troops would "coordinate with Iraqi security forces at all levels -- national, regional and local-- to achieve unity of command of military operations in which Iraqi forces are engaged." Powell also said the U.S. military would continue to jail Iraqis but only "where this is necessary for imperative reasons of security." Council members on Monday were also scheduled to hear a briefing by U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi, instrumental in helping to form an interim Iraqi government in time for the handover. In the third revision of the resolution on Friday, the United States and Britain gave the interim Iraqi government the right to order U.S. troops to leave Iraq. The latest draft also tightened language making it clear the mandate of the force would expire in January 2006, when a permanent Iraqi government is expected to take office. |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #4 But diplomats said it was doubtful Washington would agree to the language France had suggested. Was this "suggestion" dismissed out of hand? I would hope that it was. :) |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-06-07 1:00:29 PM |
| #3 Perhaps you are right #2-the Iraqi police have to start somewhere, so jailing the ordinary bad guys is as good a place as any...as long as they don't jail them and let them out the back door, per Abu. There's also the possibility that Powell is speaking with forked tongue-the GI's won't find it necessary to jail many Iraqis because the bad guys they encounter will be sent to Allah post haste. |
| Posted by: rex 2004-06-07 12:51:47 PM |
| #2 So Powell is saying our GI's are not going to be able to jail ordinary bad guys, just super duper bad guys? Yes, the Iraqi police will jail the ordinary bad guys. . |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-06-07 6:23:24 AM |
| #1 But diplomats said it was doubtful Washington would agree to the language France had suggested. There should be NO doubt whatsoever. He[Powell] said the foreign troops would "coordinate with Iraqi security forces at all levels -- national, regional and local-- to achieve unity of command of military operations in which Iraqi forces are engaged." Like share intelligence? Been there, done that...it did not work. Not to mention it's a bad idea for this kind of red tape of "unity of command" required before action can be initiated. Powell also said the U.S. military would continue to jail Iraqis but only "where this is necessary for imperative reasons of security." This dumbest thing I've ever heard Powell say. Hello...the GI's are staying in Iraq because there are lots of Iraqis who are bad guys. So Powell is saying our GI's are not going to be able to jail ordinary bad guys, just super duper bad guys? I hope State Dept. is not selling out our military. I've got bad feelings about the US back peddling to gain approval of this UN Iraq resolution. |
| Posted by: rex 2004-06-07 3:48:42 AM |