U.N. SHOWOFFS

loading...
There is likely no worse situation for Iraq than delegates at the United Nations arguing over how fast a new Iraqi government ought to be put in place – as suicide bombers strike wherever they feel they will inflict the most damage. President Bush’s speech yesterday will not…
Sign in or Subscribe to view this content.

There is likely no worse situation for Iraq than delegates at the United Nations arguing over how fast a new Iraqi government ought to be put in place – as suicide bombers strike wherever they feel they will inflict the most damage. President Bush’s speech yesterday will not win new allies but neither are the comments coming from France and Germany helpful. The two sides are reinforcing a standoff without a point but with serious consequences for the Iraqi people.

President Bush in his U.N. speech yesterday again asserted his concern about weapons of mass destruction: “The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder, and refused to account for them when confronted by the world.” By being vague about what period of time he was referring to – was this 1988, was it during his father’s administration, didn’t Saddam account for many of them in the mid-1990s? – the president tried to reassure Americans that he was right about the latest war while simultaneously irritating “old Europe.”

French President Jacques Chirac, who was the model of patience before the war, suddenly is in a hurry. “In Iraq, the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, who must have sole responsibility for their future, is essential for stability and reconstruction,” he told the Washington Post yesterday. He too is vague about a timetable, thereby allowing a platitude to stand as a statement of principle. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder was only a little more specific, saying it should happen in “a matter of months.” But why would a time deadline supercede a recognition of stability in Baghdad or Tikrit, evidence of safety for civilians, mileposts for infrastructure?

Before the war, President Bush did not appreciate the need for many substantial allies in rebuilding Iraq. He does now, and is making something of an attempt to gain their cooperation. The nations that opposed the war had their opportunity yesterday to say, “I told you so.” Now both sides, the United States and Britain and much of the rest of the U.N. Security Council, must develop a new resolution that begins with the certain understanding that Iraq cannot be lost, that the remnants of the previous government and the terrorists that have been drawn to the chaos there must not be allowed to gain power.

President Bush was scheduled to begin individual meetings today with leaders from France, Germany, Pakistan and India. If they are serious about Iraq, the showmanship of yesterday will be dropped for the difficult diplomacy crucial to Iraq’s future.


Have feedback? Want to know more? Send us ideas for follow-up stories.

comments for this post are closed

By continuing to use this site, you give your consent to our use of cookies for analytics, personalization and ads. Learn more.