France and Germany dug in for another diplomatic battle yesterday when they rejected American proposals for a new UN resolution on Iraq. "We are very, very far removed from having a resolution in front of us which we can agree to," said President Jacques Chirac after talks in Dresden with Chancellor Gerhard Schröder.
"Non again!"
"The proposals seem quite far from what appears to us the primary objective, namely the reinstatement of our oil contracts transfer of political responsibility to an Iraqi government as soon as possible."
Mr Schroder was less harsh but stuck by M Chirac. He said America was showing signs of new thinking but its latest move was still "not dynamic enough and not far-reaching enough".
Sorry, TGA, don’t think Schroder will make to the ranch after all.
Facing daily casualties in Iraq and large-scale bombings that killed Sergio Vieira de Mello, the United Nations envoy, and the Shi’ite leader Ayatollah Muhammad Baqer al-Hakim, Washington is to seek a new UN resolution to encourage other countries to send troops and funds. The move is a climb-down by the Bush administration, which made no secret of its contempt for the UN after the failed attempt to secure a Security Council resolution authorising war.
You folks at the Telegraph might not be able to see it, but this resolution continues that fine tradition of contempt.
Immediately after the downfall of Saddam Hussein, the Security Council unanimously agreed to a US call for all sanctions against Iraq to be lifted and granted America and Britain unfettered powers to run the country. But as the security situation has deteriorated but modestly, France and Germany may feel they now have enough strength to take on America in a new round of diplomatic arm-wrestling.
The US-drafted resolution, which has not been formally published, offers the UN an "expanded" role. It sets a timetable for a new constitution and a return to Iraqi rule. It also offers greater diplomatic cover for other countries - such as Turkey, India and Pakistan - to send troops to Iraq.
Still a mistake to let those three in.
Despite the U-turn, there is no sign that Washington will give up its absolute political and military authority in Iraq. France says political control should be transferred from the Coalition Provisional Authority to the UN.
Dream on, Jacques!
Britain will resume its familiar role of trying to bridge the gap at the UN but Whitehall sources said the French position was unacceptable. "Changing the political structure of the authority is too high a price to pay for a resolution," said one. "The French will play hardball for some time but in the end will have to compromise."
The bargaining may eventually be decided by Russia. Moscow at first lined up with Paris and Berlin in opposing the war but in recent days has sent supportive signals to America. As President Vladimir Putin prepares to visit Washington later this month, Sergei Ivanov, his defence minister, said Russia may send peacekeepers to Iraq as part of an international force. "Outright, I do not reject it or rule it out," said Mr Ivanov. "Everything depends on the unity of opinion in the Security Council" and the degree to which the UN will have influence on Iraq’s future.
"Nice playing with you, Jaques, but we need to think of ourselves, and you French boys don’t seem capable of any heavy lifting."
In Washington, Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, seemed to take a sanguine view of the French and German opposition. "I think the resolution is drafted in a way that deals with the concerns that leaders such as President Chirac and Chancellor Schroder have raised in the past. If they have suggestions, we would be more than happy to listen."
Colin just raised his bet. That was a big blue chip tossed into the pile. |