Looming rift over Iraq's future

Looming rift over Iraq's future

By Barnaby Mason BBC diplomatic correspondent

The role of the United Nations in post-war Iraq is a key issue at the summit in the United States between President George W Bush and the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

There are signs the two allies do not see eye to eye on how prominent a part the UN should play.

Blair and Bush differ over the UN role

In addition, disagreements between Washington and other big powers in the Security Council are much sharper. The bitter confrontation in the Security Council over whether the war was justified in the first place has left wounds unhealed.

There are two sets of issues: in the short term, humanitarian aid; in the longer term, the reconstruction of Iraq and how it should be run until a representative government is installed.

Agreeing on immediate aid for the people of Iraq should be relatively straightforward, since everyone agrees it is vital.

Oil-for-food programme

The US and Britain are preparing to bring in relief supplies themselves as soon as possible.

The UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, emphasises that under the Geneva Conventions the powers exercising authority on the ground - that is, in many areas, the Americans and British - are primarily responsible for the well-being of the population.

unless the US wants to end up paying for everything itself, it may have to compromise to secure international participation in the rebuilding of Iraq

But they also want to reactivate the UN oil-for-food programme, which has fed 60% of Iraqis for several years. The programme has the resources for a large-scale operation, but it was suspended when the UN pulled its expatriate staff out of Iraq when the war began.

However, modifying the programme to allow the UN to run it without the participation of the Iraqi Government has proved tricky.

Reluctance

It means a new Security Council resolution, and two rival drafts have been circulating - one drawn up by Kofi Annan; the other by the American ambassador to the UN, John Negroponte.

Diplomats say some members of the Council - notably Syria but also France, Russia and China - are reluctant to approve wording that implies, in the middle of the war, that there is no functioning government in Baghdad.

There are also doubts about requiring UN bodies to co-ordinate their relief efforts with American and British troops - on the grounds that this would indirectly legitimise the military action.

These same arguments are at the heart of the controversy over what the long term role of the UN should be. Beyond humanitarian aid, Mr Annan says further UN involvement will have to be decided by the member states through another more far-reaching Security Council resolution.

There are doubts about UN bodies co-ordinating their relief effort with the military

That will be a much harder nut to crack, but according to Mr Blair it is essential.

On Tuesday, he said a resolution would be needed to unlock international financial resources from bodies like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund - as well as from the European Union.

Mr Blair emphasised that he was talking about reconstruction after years of misgovernment by President Saddam Hussein - not as a result of allied bombing.

However, President Jacques Chirac of France has suggested that those responsible for the war should pay for rebuilding. There was an identical message this week from a German minister.

US or UN?

But a UN mandate will be more difficult to obtain if - as many suspect - Washington wants to minimise the UN's role in any transitional administration.

Before leaving for his talks in the US, Mr Blair said it was common ground between him and President Bush that the UN had to be involved in post-war Iraq. But he did not say Mr Bush shared his own view that its role must be central.

There are, as so often, different opinions within the administration. Mr Blair may be hoping to influence the debate in his direction. But it is very unlikely that the US would agree to the UN taking the lead.

Reports suggest that it intends to install a retired general, Jay Garner, as civil administrator in Iraq, with American civilians working alongside selected Iraqis in government ministries.

France and Russia, with big economic interests of their own at stake in Iraq, are unlikely to co-operate in legitimising this scenario through the UN.

So unless the US wants to end up paying for everything itself, it may have to compromise to secure international participation in the rebuilding of Iraq.