Resolution's key issues

By Paul Reynolds BBC News Online world affairs correspondent

The US and British governments have to clear up apparent differences of view about the powers of the interim Iraqi government due to take over on 30 June.

The British Prime Minister Tony Blair on Tuesday restated what a senior official said on Monday - the interim Iraqi government will have a veto on actions of US, British and other foreign troops.

Requests member states... to contribute assistance to the multinational force, including military forces... Full draft text (331k)

However, some hours later the US Secretary of State Colin Powell appeared to undermine the statement by suggesting that US forces would not necessarily be subject to a veto, though he added that he did not think it was a "big deal."

Mr Blair appeared to be trying to boost the the status of the interim government, which until recently looked as if it was going to be very weak.

Mr Powell on the other hand was keen to stress the right of US troops to protect themselves. He also said that the US would "take into account" the views of the local government.

The terms under which the troops will operate are broadly covered in the draft UN resolution. This says that they will have the "consent" of the Iraqi government but that there will "co-ordination" between the two.

The exact terms are due to be addressed in an exchange of letters once the interim government is appointed.

A veto power would enable the interim government to shape the role of foreign troops. However, these troops, to be called a "multinational force" (MNF) will also be given the right to use "all necessary means" to maintain order in a United Nations Security Council resolution.

The US and British governments hope that the resolution will be adopted within about two weeks.

Review but no pull-out date

There is no withdrawal date for the MNF in the draft resolution. The force will have a mandate lasting up to a year. It will then be reviewed, though it could be reviewed from January if another, elected Iraqi government to take office from then, so requests.

In theory, the interim appointed Iraqi government will also be able to ask the troops to leave but in practice it is not expected to.

Any arguments will be resolved in an Iraqi national security council which will be led by the Iraqi prime minister. An American and a British general will sit on it but under current plans, the US ambassador is not expected to have a seat. Nor is the UN.

"Iraq will have a veto," the British official said.

The draft resolution was presented to the Security Council by the US and UK on Monday.

The resolution includes the following key points:

• It "endorses the formation of a sovereign government of Iraq that will take office by 30 June 2004" and welcomes "the commitment of the occupying powers to an end the occupation"

• It sets out a timetable for the political process, which will see the interim government hold office until elections to a national assembly in December or January, and eventually full elections

• It says that the UN will help organise elections and convene a consultative assembly as part of the process of developing political dialogue; if security permits, the UN will also undertake other tasks such as developing a census for the elections

• On security, the most difficult issue, it says that the Security Council recognises "the importance of the consent of the sovereign government of Iraq for the multinational force and of close coordination between the multinational force and the government"

• It says that the "multinational force shall have authority to take all necessary measures to contribute to the maintenance of security"

• It welcomes "arrangements that are being put in place to establish a partnership between the MNF and the sovereign interim government of Iraq and to ensure co-ordination between the two"

'Status of forces' deal

The British official said the arrangements would be covered in an exchange of letters between the MNF and the interim Iraqi government, once it was appointed.

Iraq should be governed by Iraqis who have been chosen by and are fully accountable to other Iraqis Mogens Lumbye, Demark Have your say

The UN envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, hopes to have a list of names by the end of this month or soon afterwards.

The letters will deal with the role of the national security council, and will in effect be the kind of "status of forces" agreement normal in peacekeeping operations such as those in Afghanistan, Bosnia and Kosovo.

The MNF will not be subject to Iraqi law but to the laws of the troops' home countries. Iraqi forces will come under Iraqi command and will not need to take part in MNF operations but will fall under MNF orders if they do.

The details in these letters will be important as the exact nature of Iraqi control, such as a veto, over security is not addressed in detail by the resolution.

Other key points:

• The mandate of the MNF will be reviewed in 12 months or at the request of the transitional government taking power next January; this could be an issue if France insists on a clearer date for withdrawal

• A separate unit within the MNF will be set up to protect UN personnel, and member states are asked to contribute

• Iraqi forces will be trained up "progressively to play a greater role" in security

Tight adoption timetable

The British official also said that senior Iraqi prisoners such as Saddam Hussein would not immediately be handed over to the Iraqis. Iraqi law would apply in the prisons. The MNF would still have the right to detain and question suspects.

On economic issues, the resolution says that the interim government will control Iraq's oil money with international supervision.

However, British officials made clear that it would not have any power over long-term oil contracts and its legislative powers would be minimal. It will have no right to make or change any security or constitutional law.

The timetable for adoption of the resolution is tight.

London and Washington hope that the new interim government will be named at the end of May. Then the exchange of letters on security will be quickly agreed and the resolution put to a vote around 6 June.

The ideal for the US and UK would be for it to be passed in time for the D-Day celebration on 6 June, and if not then by the G8 summit on 8 June.