The UN Security Council has approved a revised US-UK resolution for the future of Iraq.
The document intends to outline out the relationship between Iraq's government and foreign forces.
It also states that the US-led coalition will consult Iraqi leaders over major military actions.
France and Germany agreed to back amended coalition plans for the country while Russia and China broadly welcomed them.
Will the UN resolution make a difference? What impact will it have on the handover plan? Tell us what you think.
The following comments reflect the balance of opinion we have received so far.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. This old cowboy saying applies to today's Iraq. If the Iraqis want to go the way of North Korea or Vietnam the world cannot stop them.
Gunars, Riga, Latvia
The resolution for the future of Iraq is a victory for Bush and a big defeat for France and Germany. These countries proved that they are nothing more than tails of US policy. They could stay out, because, those who started the war, without UN resolution, have to give the solution. The impact of their support and the future will be shown shortly. The UN resolutions mean nothing for the suffering people of Iraq.
P Aslanidis, Patras, Greece
Amazing, people are still mad Saddam was toppled. Ten years from now, when Iraq is blossoming with wealth and stability, I wonder how people will look back on it. I haven't seen any help of oil here in America, and we still pay for any oil we get from Iraq. Lets face it, Iraq doesn't have much to offer in trade right now except oil, makes it easy for the anti-freedom crowd to use it as an excuse...
Unfortunately a lot of people want to hear bad news from Iraq. They couldn't care less about the Iraqi people themselves, they just want to run down the US or Bush or Blair. Whilst the UN resolution does nothing for the Iraqi people themselves, it will help cut down on the left's anti-Americanism.
Evan Jones, Cardiff, Wales
In South America we know only too well that formal independence is just the door to a much deeper, abusive kind of dependence. USA cares not for people, and bases its right in its army. That way it is not possible we'll ever get a free world.
Santiago, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Iraq is just another Somalia in the making.
Peter CW Chacha, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Will the UN resolution make a difference? We can only hope it will. It certainly can't be much worse than Bush's old plan, where he rendered the UN irrelevant and implemented his go it alone approach.
Dan, Oxnard, California, USA
I am stunned by the comments here. It is one thing to disagree with the US Iraq Policy and quite another to fabricate silly theories. Many critics here have far too much time and imagination on their hands. The UN resolution is a huge step forward for Iraq. Whether it will work or not is another issue, but this is an unambiguously positive development.
David, Philadelphia, USA
Democracy by dictatorship. If this is not what the USA and UK are imposing on Iraqi's then what is? Listening to the new Iraqi government officials it is clear for all to see that the stooges of USA who have been paid for; trained by and installed into government are now singing the praises of their masters.
M Jawaid Ali, Milton Keynes, UK
I don't know how so few have commented on the positive aspects of getting this resolution. It will bring greater world consensus to bear on how Iraq is governed. This can't be a bad thing?
Pia Sawhney, NYC, USA
It's a UN resolution by 15 countries not the UN General Assembly and what arm twisting went on to get this we won't know for about another 20 years, therefore not very democratic, much like Iraq at the moment. It's not likely to mean much to the Iraqis, they are probably more interested in getting back the basics, food electricity etc, they had before the Americans came.
Intasar Khan, London, UK
What about a justification of the war? We don't have this in the resolution. Moreover Bush is too strong and too dangerous for the world.
Bernadette, Paris, France
If UN Security Council approved the current resolution. Why in the first have they blocked the resolution that call for the war. The UN Security Council is playing double standard, and Bush was right to term UN as a hurdle to world security.
I am suspicious of political moves coming from the US and UK to give a show of solving the problems that they have artificially created. Eventually Iraq will be a sovereign state without foreign interference and use its natural wealth for the benefit of its citizens and free trade with other states. The superpowers should clear out their bases from Iraq and other countries and leave the civilised world to get on with a peaceful existence.
Raymond Libreri, Siggiewi, Malta
UN has not only justified US occupation of Iraq but also the humiliation of the people of Iraq and gave other super powers green light to do what they want against other nations.
Mack Mackian, Sweden
I am glad that it was passed but it is amazing that know that the UN will have there hand in Iraq, as always everything will get messed up. For some reason the UN never does anything that works.
Tony, Plano, USA
It's about time there was a united approach to Iraq. While I have been opposed to the war, I've also felt the polarisation of opinion has meant that we have not been able to work effectively at helping Iraq in the aftermath. At least now there is a bit more hope for the country - more than they would have had under Saddam at any rate.
Jack Davenport, Preston, England
I think the UN has been reduced to being a puppet with the strings in the hands of the US and the UK. When the US wants to go to war, the UN cannot prevent it. When the US goes to the UN with a begging bowl because it cannot economically sustain the war, the UN accedes. To think that the UN was created to prevent war....
Usha P, Dundee, Scotland
I think the big news is end of the CPA and the establishment of an interim government. This resolution is mostly an endorsement of that fact but it will help ease the relations between the interim government and the outside world.
Richard Crawford, Manchester, UK
This spells the end of the United Nations as a force to be reckoned with in world politics. It marks the reality that the USA rules the world and nothing can stop its use of its military power.
Adam, Molesey, UK
Let's make it clear - this UN resolution does not change the fact that the war was illegal, and 11 out of the 15 council members didn't support it. It may provide some diplomatic cover for spinning prior to the US elections in November, but whether it will make Iraq a more stable country is yet to be seen.
Karim, London, UK
I don't think it will make any difference whatsoever. All we have been shown is power being delegated to a hand picked interim government which the Americans hope will be seen as handing power back to the Iraqis. In reality the interim government will not make any decisions without first consulting the Americans or without gaining American consent. So the world will see that Iraq is active in its own decision making but in fact America pulls all the strings.
I think the resolution has betrayed the Kurds, who were the only allies of the American led coalition. I do not believe that Kurds and Arabs can live side by side simply because of the difference in attitudes of the two societies. The north is well maintained and democratic to a certain extent whereas the rest of the country is in turmoil. I think the country should be divided and the resolution is wrong.
Asos, Manchester, England
Living under an occupying military power with no power to veto their military operations - can you call this sovereignty? Not me. It is a complete eyewash with France, Russia and China trying to play tough but giving in to US muscle eventually. This whole episode is a sad drama played on the lives and freedom of Iraqi people.
Rakesh, London, UK
France, Germany and the UN Security Council are all irrelevant, but it was probably a good idea to throw them a bone to shut up their whining.
Doug, Sacramento, CA
I just wonder how the Spanish President of Government, Zapatero, can face his electorate this next 13th of June, after being so sure that UN would not reach a resolution before the 30th of June and therefore, removing Spanish troops harshly¿ What kind of information did he have? How childish can a government be now-a-days, playing with international defence?
Sofia Pinto, Lisbon, Portugal
Perhaps if the UN had done its job properly to begin with, we would not be looking for a resolution now.
Craig, London, UK
Sorry, I'm confused. Does this mean that the UN means something again? I seem to remember no-one caring what it thought just over a year ago. This document means nothing because the Iraqi government would be overthrown by its own people the second the coalition leaves.
Resolutions, constitution and laws are there to apply the ethical and moral conduct of a free people and their aspirations. The Iraqi people are silenced by the exclusive club of the UN Security Council members. On what basis such broad decisions are taken? Has anyone bothered to take the pulse or the popular backing of the Iraqis?
Omar, Rome, Italy
It's a great step forward. People looking for magic solutions will never find one. Recovery is always a slow process and this is definitely a step in the right direction. Iraq suffered from Saddam Hussein much more that it did from the war. Today its main enemy is terrorism led by al-Qaeda extremists based in Iraq primarily in the Sunni triangle. These people are fighting the occupation. I hope the politicians in Iraq and the world will ensure that the right message is passes clearly: The occupation has formally ended.
What does it matter what anyone thinks or believes apart from those who live in Iraq or the terrorists. The former will still feel that they only have a US led government and the latter will pay no attention to democracy of any sort even if it came direct from an Iraqi elected government.
Mark Claflin, Norwich, UK
It's really quite simple. If you agreed with the US/UK military action, the UN resolution will have a positive impact. If you didn't agree, nothing positive will ever be possible!
For those of us who opposed the war, the current process has the appearance of a monumental sleight of hand by the coalition powers. By installing a government of exiles they've gained the requisite fig-leaf from the UN, who had no choice but to endorse the continuing occupation since that endorsement is the only way to free elections. The question is whether we get to free elections. Remember this new government is the former governing council, who were supposed to disband but wouldn't.
Steve Bates-Armytage, Cambridge, England
This resolution does not mean any thing to the Iraqis especially the Kurds when it dose not mention any thing about their rights in the new Iraq.
Kardo, Sydney, Australia
Only time can tell whether or not the UN resolution will make a difference. The resolution will however pave way for other countries to participate in the coalition who have been waiting for full UN endorsement and hence help USA and UK reduce the number of troops in Iraq. Whether or not this reduction in US and UK troops pacify the dissidents, is anybody's guess.
Inder D Kumar, Sheffield, UK
This resolution, along with other past resolutions are filled with ambiguities of language which allow the countries with the most muscle to interpret the resolution to fit their view point and enforce it when their interests deem necessary. Justice, stopping support of oppressive regimes, and resolving the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the only thing that will make a difference in the Middle East, the rest is mere ink on paper and vain commentary.
It all boils down to intentions and as yet we have not seen the real intentions of the US. In my view, their agenda is and has been quite clear from the beginning - they want to control a major oil source, its finances, its politics and its regional influence. This resolution is buying the US time and endeavours to assure the American public that they do not have to wait long for the boys to come home. Just long enough to get the elections out of the way!
Serge Pensa, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
A sovereign country was invaded, so many of its citizens were killed, so many children were made orphans, so many properties damaged just to fulfil one man's ego. The UN Council remained a mute spectator. Now this Resolution is yet another sheet of paper and nothing else. Bush has total control over the oil reserves in Iraq and in my view that was the main reason for invading Iraq. As long as the MNF stays in Iraq, the Iraqis cannot claim that they are citizens of a sovereign country.
KS Balachandran, Chennai, India
Great News! Democracy in the Middle East is the only hope for lasting peace. I think Germany and France had no impact on this process and were on the verge of marginalizing themselves at the expense of the Iraqi people.
Tom Wheaton, Den Haag, Netherlands
Isn't it strange that now Iraq will be able to make deals with other counties, how quickly those countries come back singing the praises of the coalition. It wasn't too long ago that people like Chirac and the UN Council were bleating against action to free the Iraqis. I can see the money symbols in their eyes already.
Means nothing. No politician in any country is going to risk his reputation and position by doing too much in such an incredible messy situation like Iraq. It's an empty gesture. A band-aid to cover deep wounds. Big on promises and that's all.
Mike, Los Angeles, USA
Sadly this Resolution means nothing, simply because it hands 'sovereignty' to the US elected (and funded and trained) Interim Authority. In hearing the new 'Prime Minister' welcome the continued presence of coalition troops, we should remember that he does not speak for the ordinary Iraqi, indeed he is almost completely unknown in Iraq having been comfortably in (US)exile for many years. Also, in promising to leave if asked, does this apply to the 3,000 strong US Embassy and the 14 permanent bases the US is building? I salute Chirac, Schroeder and others for being sceptical.
Andrew, Paris, France
I think it has every chance of success providing that the actions of the Coalition forces clearly show that they are working WITH the Iraq government for the betterment of the Iraqi people and country and not the Iraq government working for/with the foreign forces. I think this is a fundamental requirement.
Derek, Essex, UK
The UN will have to undertake a great deal of active participation and lead role in the reconstruction of Iraq to regain the credibility and respect of the world.
Soadad, Iraqi living in the UK
For many objectors, the lack of UN approval was the keystone of their resistance to the war in Iraq. I'd not be surprised if this historic vote knocks out a core of the current anti-war movement. The clarion call of "Illegal Occupation" that so many heralded is now utterly vacuous.
John Swaine, UK
John Swaine, the resolution does not in the slightest bit take away from the fact that the occupation was, and is wrong. It is merely the result of accepting what has happened and moving forward and away from the mess that Iraq now is. The test will be how far the US sticks to the resolution.
Iraq is still without electricity, without clean water, without security, without waste disposal, without phones, without jobs, without good medical care, without reconstruction. Iraq does not want yet another piece of paper, Iraqis want to rebuild Iraq.
Kazim, Iraq/ UK
Who do they think they're kidding? The US has made no secret of its intent to move bases from Saudi Arabia to Iraq, and to maintain an embassy of 3,000 people in Baghdad. It's "privatised" most of the Iraqi people's assets already, has a firm grip on the oil, and is planning to extract billions in compensation for the costs it incurred in the invasion! Some sovereignty, eh?
Mick Verran, Boston, USA
I will have to read the fine print to see how the resolution would impact national security. It seems, without even reading it, that critics of the Bush administration are going to have to come up with creative ways to spin this.
Jaime, New York, USA
The UN resolution is merely a sugar coated pill. It changes nothing except for a UN stamp of approval. The problems remain the same, so don't expect anything radical to come out of this.
Andie, Sydney, Australia
The resolution does not make a difference with respect to the burden that US and coalition troops will bear for years to come. It does make a difference in providing a cover of legitimacy for US occupation and for the interim Iraqi government.
R. Strong, San Antonio, Texas
It will have as much of an impact as the Iraqis themselves allow it to. While the US can remove the obstacles, the task of creating a truly free and democratic Iraq falls to the Iraqis themselves. I certainly hope they're up to it.
Scott Forbus, Dallas, USA
With or without the UN resolution, America will still do what she deems fit. This world is in trouble, until another superpower emerges to balance the equation.
Salihu Bakari, Yola, Nigeria
It appears that as far as actual substance goes, that Bush got everything he wanted and now has a UN resolution too. Although this probably should be no surprise since in the end he was holding the strongest hand of cards.
The most significant impact of the resolution will be that the UN has finally removed itself as an obstacle to the stabilisation and rebuilding processes.
Les, Houston, USA
I think that Iraqis will see that the UN, especially the sceptical members, are now taking a positive view of developments in their country. It sends a message that there is increasing confidence in the future of the country and that surely is a good thing for the handover.
I think it will, because it will at least add some legitimacy, and it may help the Iraqis feel that they have a little bit of a say over how the military operations go.
Justin, New Jersey, USA