UN back in the Iraq picture

By Susannah Price
BBC United Nations correspondent

Tuesday's unanimous vote at the United Nations Security Council in favour of the resolution ending the occupation in Iraq and transferring sovereignty to the Iraqis was hailed by many diplomats as a "milestone".

The US has been the lone force in much of Iraq for over a year

While the focus was clearly on what this resolution would mean for Iraq, and whether the violence and lawlessness would allow the ambitious timetable to be put into practice, the vote also has important implications for the UN itself.

No one at the Security Council has forgotten the bitter divisions among Security Council members in the lead-up to the Iraq war last year.

It proved impossible for the US and Britain to push through a resolution that would pave the way for military action - and in the end they did without.

After the war, the Security Council passed a resolution welcoming the establishment of the new Governing Council and on Iraq's political and economic reconstruction - but the dispute about the war itself remained.

Officials here said that one of the functions of the UN was to be blamed for what everyone else does

Originally, the US-led coalition showed little interest in involving the UN in Iraq, despite talk of its vital role.

However, as security deteriorated and as opposition to the US plans for choosing a new government grew, President Bush turned to the UN and in particular, the UN secretary general's advisor, Lakhdar Brahimi, for help.

Mr Brahimi was instrumental in drawing up the new interim government.

Centre of the process

Before the vote all 15 members of the United Nations Security Council had already signalled that they wanted to agree on a resolution on Iraq's future.

The US and UK wanted to send the strongest signal possible that their plans for Iraq, including the role of the American-led multi-national force, would have full international backing.

Other Security Council members were equally keen to see the organisation put firmly at the centre of the process.

They also praised the efforts made by London and Washington to listen to their concerns and make some revisions.

"I think what is important is that those people who said the UN was irrelevant, seem to believe now that it is not that irrelevant and it can be useful," said Mr Brahimi who has been the UN Special envoy in Iraq.

'Creative ways'

However the UN's backing for the blueprint for Iraq could backfire if the situation deteriorates further.

The UN Security Council is now seen as having endorsed the new government and mandated the American led forces to maintain security.

Escalating violence could now lead to the UN being criticised

If the violence increases and elections can not be held as scheduled at the end of the year, the Council may be held responsible.

However officials here said that one of the functions of the UN was to be blamed for what everyone else does, so that would not be anything new.

The resolution also outlines an extensive role for the UN in the political process which would include helping to organise elections, protecting human rights and assisting with the drawing up of a constitution.

The UN withdrew its international staff from Iraq after suicide bomb attacks on its headquarters in Baghdad although Mr Brahimi and others have made trips there.

The UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has said the threats of continued violence could limit the UN's actions inside Iraq but it would not stop their work.

"If circumstances do not permit, we may have to find some creative ways of doing as much as we can," he told reporters shortly after the vote.