Middle East News
US calls for larger UN role, new UN envoy in Iraq
Jul 20, 2007, 16:23 GMT
New York - The United States Friday called for the appointment of a new and more powerful Iraq envoy from the United Nations to help foster national and political reconciliation in Iraq.
'In Iraq, the US supports a larger UN role because we believe that with the right envoy and mandate, it is the best vehicle to address two fundamental issues driving the crisis in Iraq,' US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said in an editorial piece published by The New York Times.
Khalilzad, who was the US envoy in Afghanistan (2003-2005) and Iraq (2005-2006), said he saw first-hand UN effectiveness in working with developing countries.
He said the UN has 'unmatched convening power' to help a national process of distributing political and economic power - the first of two fundamental issues.
'In the role of mediator, it has inherent legitimacy and the flexibility to talk to all parties, including elements outside the political process,' he said.
Second, Khalilzad said the UN envoy should help Iraq complete work ranging from laws governing the distribution of oil revenues, reviewing the constitution, demobilizing the militias, and reaching an agreement to end the war with insurgents.
The UN is currently co-chairing an International Compact with the Iraqi government, which is helping to rebuild the war-torn nation.
Khalilzad cited UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's support for a wider UN role. In a meeting with US President George W Bush in Washington this week, Ban called the Iraq situation 'a problem of the whole world' and said the UN is ready to help the country overcome the crisis.
The current UN mission in Iraq is headed by a special representative of the UN secretary general, Ashraf Qazi of Pakistan.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Jerusalem prelate tells Arab Spring youth to have confidence
- 2. More than 100 killed in Syria ahead of ceasefire deadline
- 3. At least 43 killed in Syria, despite UN criticism
- 4. 19 killed in Syria as ceasefire deadline approaches
- 5. Pilgrims flock to Jerusalem for Easter, Passover
Older Talkback
page: 1
One needn't be a Neocon to find reasons to disparage the U.N.
The UN is a bunch of softy's all with their own agenda's.
Sponge Cake is what comes to mind when I hear UN.
They'll probably want to write them a letter, ooohhh that'll show them.
Harden up UN and be a force to be reckoned with and not a bunch of appeasers.
This body is supposed to sort out the rouge nations of the world.
What a pathetic effort with Iran so far, these rouge nations should be shit scared to upset the UN, instead the likes of Iran etc just sit there
and laugh at you lot.
HARDEN UP UN and be responsible for a change.
PB your a fool. My problem with your stupid words is that the first coalition of countries called a cease fire to the first Iraq war under certain conditions. I guess you do not read history or are to stupid to read. No fly zones were broken within a few months, allied troops came under fire (break of cease fire retard).
I guess my problem with your fool voice is that you side with your enemies and ask nothing from them while at the same time asking allies to bend over and be saints. Only a child could argue such a thing.
The UN was in Iraq at the invitation of the neocons. (whenever you hear that word neocons brace yourself for the liberal propaganda that is sure to follow) The terrorists blew up the UN compound killing a bunch of Un members including that italian guy who was supposed to bew the next secretary general. So the UN left.
Now that the country is more secure maybe they will have some success. I hope so.
The real impetus behind dragging the UN back into the picture is to deal with Turkey. Presumably Turkey is a NATO ally, but there isn't a whole lot of love lost between them and the US nor between the and the EU at the moment.
The UN is a captive to any one member on the Security Council. The UN should be strengthened but there are elements that want the UN to be weak. Example--After World WarI, many world leaders wanted to strengthen the League which included President Wilson but the Republicans played their obstructionist card and there was no ratification in the Senate. If the League of Nations had been strengthened there may not have been a World War II. Wikipedis-League of Nations.
Goose needs to learn to read the actual post. Perhaps his head is up his ass, imitating Bush's colonoscopy.
I'm NOT defending the U.N.'s record per se, but rather pointing out the hypocrisy of Bush's demeaning them; and then turning to them when he needs them. UNMOVIC was a group of professionals doing scientific work; not a political arm. Other agencies such as UNESCO have also done much for society.
Turkey, as Noharness points out, is the immediate problem. 'The real impetus behind dragging the UN back into the picture is to deal with Turkey. Presumably Turkey is a NATO ally, but there isn't a whole lot of love lost between them and the US nor between the and the EU at the moment.'
Pakistan also lingers. The only forum where all countries can quickly come face to face is the United Nations, and that's where Bush ends up going, reluctantly. If we paid our dues, and worked to gather those nations who still view us favorably, we'd have more influence. Based on the number of member countries, and the makeup of the Security Council, the days of Dag Hammarskjöld are long past. Bush suffers from a long-ago sense of entitlement, as do his supporters.
We will eventually need Turkey as an exit point from Iraq. Originally, the elections in Turkey before the Iraq War led to their asking Bush for a very large payment in order to let the 4th I.D. attack Baghdad from the north. We refused to pay, and troops and a great deal of gear had to be loaded back on ships, and sailed around to another entry point.
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3070302/
Turkey is on the verge of an invasion into Iraq, and the AKP (Islamist) party is leading in the election. The EU is reluctant to allow admittance to Turkey.
'The AKP is widely seen as an Islamist party, a potential threat to the official secularism that has kept Turkey safe from the religious extremism of the Middle East for the past 80 years. Hundreds of thousands of Turks took to the streets this summer when it seemed that AKP Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, whose wife wears a head scarf, was about to be appointed president.
page: 1
pbJul 20th, 2007 - 17:12:54
After years of Neocon disparagement of the U.N., suddenly they're the solution?
Wasn't it the U.N. weapons inspectors who did not find WMD's in Iraq, and recently the U.S. and Britain ended the UNMOVIC mission?
Bush is flailing for a solution, and looking for someone else to blame for the eventual failure stemming from the Iraqi leaderships' own inability to run their country. This will drag on through Bush's term, because he needs someone else to take the blame.
Report this comment