[Nasional-e] The UN will come around to the Bush-Blair view

[Ambon]

The UN will come around to the Bush-Blair view

David M. Malone IHT  Saturday, February 1, 2003

Iraq I

NEW YORK Nobody now can doubt that the United States intends to proceed with
military action against Iraq. The grim report placed before the United
Nations Security Council this week by the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans
Blix, is clear: Iraq is providing access but no substantive cooperation in
disarming.
.
President George W. Bush has reset the Security Council's clock. Secretary
of State Colin Powell will be dispatched to New York next Wednesday to start
the push to authorize use of force against Iraq. It is likely the council
will give its approval, although it may take some weeks.
.
Foreign governments note that Powell, their best advocate in Washington, has
closed ranks with other senior figures in the Bush administration. Now that
military action is certain - barring a flight of Saddam Hussein into exile
(possible at the last minute) or his overthrow in Baghdad (unlikely) -
foreign capitals will be straining to support Washington.
.
No government today wants to oppose Washington gratuitously. Vital national
interests everywhere include having the best possible relationship with the
United States. Concern at the United Nations is much greater now over the
post-conflict phase in Iraq - for which U.S. planning is, at best, opaque -
than over war itself.
.
The chief dynamic in the Security Council since the end of the Cold War has
been one of cooperation among its five permanent members - the United
States, Russia, China, Britain and France. They have been split seriously
only twice: over Kosovo, briefly in 1999, and over Iraq, on and off, since
1998.
.
China and Russia have both been forging stronger ties with America. This
leaves France, which last year cast itself as the champion of international
legitimacy as enshrined in the UN charter. France induced the United States
into a lengthy negotiation over the terms of a strong new mandate for UN
inspectors in Iraq. Both sides compromised heavily in gaining unanimous
council support. France's status internationally was greatly enhanced, but
so was that of the United States, which showed that it could be sensitive to
the views of allies.
.
France will not want the United States to bypass the council in coming
weeks, which would undermine the council's role and devalue France's
permanent seat and veto. Paris will also be reluctant to be dealt out of the
new balance of influence in the Middle East that will arise from changes in
Iraq. Finally, France may not want to contribute further to the crisis in
the supposedly common European defense and foreign policy that a bust-up
over Iraq will exacerbate.
.
Powell must share as much intelligence as possible with the Security Council
in an effort to help skeptical governments to move in America's direction.
Bullying France is unlikely to be effective; allowing France to re-engineer
its position gently is more likely to work.
.
The American public wants company in an attack on Iraq. While Britain,
Spain, Italy and Australia will support the American military in several
ways under any circumstances if the United States attacks Iraq, the
participation of a wider set of allies and partners will require Security
Council cover. A council resolution would also help Prime Minister Tony
Blair of Britain, who is politically exposed at home.
.
The nine affirmative votes out of the 15 required, assuming no vetoes, have
not yet been lined up. But a successful U.S. and British effort to secure
Security Council authorization looks likely.
.
The writer, a former Canadian ambassador to the United Nations, is president
of the International Peace Academy in New York.