The Hindu : For U.N. re-engagement in Iraq

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Mar 03, 2004

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

For U.N. re-engagement in Iraq

By R. Kannan

Despite the formidable odds, the United Nations alone has the ability to lead Iraq to stability.

THE MUCH-AWAITED United Nations verdict on elections for a caretaker government in Iraq is out. The U.N. team led by the Secretary-General, Kofi Annan's special envoy, Lakdhar Brahimi, has said that credible elections are not possible by June 30, when sovereignty would revert to the Iraqis. The U.N. team also felt that elections could be held by the end of the year, that is, if work begins immediately to organise them. It should know. The U.N. has lent electoral assistance in some 70 countries. It has organised and conducted elections in Namibia, Cambodia, Eastern Slovenia (Croatia) and more recently in Kosovo and East Timor. Its expertise and impartiality made it an acceptable verifier in South Africa's first multiracial elections in 1994.

Iraq remains an unprecedented challenge though, even for the U.N. But the world body can take heart from its record in Afghanistan.

One just has to compare Taliban-run Afghanistan and today's Afghanistan. Much needs to improve further but already much has changed. In Afghanistan, the U.N. remained in the shadow of the Afghans, letting them take responsibility and ownership for their actions, all the time lending a guiding hand. Yet it firmly forged dialogue, and revitalised the Loya Jirga (assembly of tribal elders), which delivered the Afghan Interim Authority.

There are both parallels and differences between Afghanistan and Iraq. Both suffered the absence of a democratic culture for decades, societal divisions and an appalling security situation. In Iraq, the difference of course is the occupation. Despite the formidable odds, the U.N. alone has the ability to lead Iraq to stability.

The U.N. took centre-stage in Iraq after the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority's (CPA) plan to select a caretaker government through regional caucuses ran aground, with the influential Shia cleric, Ali Sistani, insisting on direct elections instead. Last January, both the CPA and the Iraqi Governing Council, a CPA-handpicked Iraqi body, sought the U.N.'s view as it became clear that Ayatollah Sistani would only respect a U.N. finding. Consequently, in the aftermath of the U.N. team's visit to Iraq, Ayatollah Sistani has called for a "vital" role for the U.N. in arriving at the "ideal formula to determine [Iraq's] political future."

This is not the first time that the U.N. has been asked to show the way in such complex situations. In 1970 the U.N. helped settle Bahrain's status. Then, Iran laid claim to Bahrain. The British, who accorded protection, countered that Bahrain was a sovereign Arab state enjoying special relations with them. Both Britain and Iran, however, entrusted to the U.N. Secretary-General, U. Thant, the responsibility of finding a way out. Subsequently, U. Thant's special envoy engaged in consultations with a wide cross-section of Bahrainis. His report that Bahrainis wanted the Iranian claim dropped permanently was later endorsed by the Security Council.Any comparison between Iraq and Bahrain should begin and end with the U.N.'s role and the consultation process. The June 30 deadline will not stem the course of violence in Iraq. It is clear that Iraqis will require time to take upon themselves security responsibilities. Meanwhile, the presence of occupying forces will remain an eyesore for many proud Iraqis and only serve to breed resistance. In this context, talk of a multinational force replacing the coalition forces is welcome indeed. Until that happens, however, the occupiers should aim to hasten their departure by building the nascent indigenous police and security structures in a professional and expeditious manner.

Not surprisingly then, Mr. Annan has ruled out a permanent presence in Iraq for now, inviting criticism from Iraq's Foreign Minister that the U.N. was "straying from its responsibilities," a harsh indictment. The Minister contended that the U.N. was needed precisely in situations where security was threatened. The U.N.'s predicament, however, is to help without compromising the lives of its staff especially after the August 19, 2003 blast when it lost many of its staff including Mr. Annan's special envoy. But there are other equally disheartening problems.

The 60 per cent Shia majority is eager to acquire and exercise the share of authority denied it for almost a century. The Kurds, for their part, want to preserve their autonomy; while the minority Sunnis are apprehensive about a majority Shia Government.

As in Afghanistan, however, Iraqis themselves should find a sustainable way of reconciling these competing aspirations. The U.N., along with the partners (the Coalition and the Arab League for instance) could provide advice and assistance but it is for the Iraqis alone to assume ownership in devising the construct of a new Iraq.

Mr. Brahimi correctly pointed out that the "international legitimacy" of the U.N. is not enough by itself to ensure the success of the process. He said Iraqi trust and a well-defined role for the U.N. are key. One might add that any role for the U.N., when it comes, should also clearly preserve the U.N.'s independence. Mr. Annan recently told Japan's Parliament that "the people of Iraq and others must see us for what we are: an impartial, independent world body, with no other agenda than to help their country in this time of need." All this will require a clear Security Council mandate investing a critical and a largely independent role for the U.N. in the transition. With the help of the Coalition, the Security Council, the regional actors, but most importantly the Iraqis themselves, the U.N. can deliver Iraq from occupation to sovereignty, from bloodshed to peace and from despotism to democracy.

The road will not be easy but then easy issues do not land on the U.N.'s doorstep. The Iraqi Governing Council has said it would be asking the U.N. for assistance in organising and supervising the elections. A good move indeed.

(R. Kannan heads civil affairs with the U.N. peacekeeping force in Cyprus. These views are his own.)

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion