The UN dilemma: in or out of Iraq?

Date:18/09/03

By Dana Spinant in Basrah

THE world's biggest powers are engaged in negotiations over enhancing the role of the United Nations in rebuilding Iraq, to give the occupation more legitimacy and to provide a legal framework for other countries to send troops and share the peacekeeping burden.

There's just one problem: both the Iraqis and United Nations' officials are far from keen for this to happen.

The Iraqis do not want to swap the American/British-led occupation for a UN-led one.

Although more legitimate, it would still mean foreign troops on their soil.

"They want their country back, not an embellishment of the present occupation," one European Commission official dealing with Iraq said.

"A UN-led occupation will probably irk them even more, as they will assume that a more internationally accepted occupation is likely to last longer than a contested American one.

"Putting the UN in charge of Iraq will not solve the present lack of security."

On top of this, Iraqis have long had an ambivalent relationship with the UN, which they blame for the imposition of economic sanctions and endless weapons of mass destruction inspections.

A former seaman acting as an interpreter for the King's Regiment in Basrah, named Allah, confirms this.

"They [the UN] imposed the sanctions against Iraq. That made us suffer," he said. "Look at my car: I did not have any spare parts for 15 years. It is a wreck. Everything in the country is a wreck."

However, he admits that the UN had been feeding the vast majority of Iraq's population through the Oil for Food programme, introduced in 1996 after it became clear that the embargo was not hurting Saddam Hussein and his ruling clique, but the poor and malnourished.

"Many families around here live on UN rations," Allah said. "More than half of the population are unemployed. They are actually dependent on the UN food." But Allah also expresses scepticism about the Oil for Food programme, suggesting it offers a means for outsiders to control Iraq's oil wealth: "Via this programme, they [the UN] have been managing our oil revenues," he said.

"Iraq should run its own oil, we know better what we need and what we want."

He agrees the United Nations should aid the poor and vulnerable in Iraq, but is adamant that it should not be given a role in running the country.

The United Nations' office of the Humanitarian Coordinator for Iraq in Basrah believes that the UN's role in the country needs to be clarified, if not enhanced.

"We are becoming experts on jumping along the transition process in Iraq," said a spokesman.

"There is no clear framework, mandate, or separation of tasks between us and the CPA [Coalition Provisional Authority] we fill the gaps where we find them.

"But it is very difficult to work in these conditions."

The official said that in some areas, such as water provision or health, the United Nations' agencies were taking the lead in the reconstruction efforts in southern Iraq. In other sectors, however, the CPA has the primary role.

"I cannot say there is a duplication of efforts - there is too much to do, anyway - but I think the UN would be better placed to coordinate the reconstruction," he added.

However, the 19 August terrorist attack on the UN headquarters in Baghdad, confirmed what many already suspected: that the UN is neither more respected nor liked than the present occupation troops.

Following the attack, which left 22 dead including the secretary-general's special envoy Sergio Viera de Mello, the UN has been reluctant to take on a greater role in Iraq.

An official at UN headquarters in New York commented after the attack that it should only accept an enhanced role if it was completely independent of the United States.

"If we are associated with the occupation by the population, we will be targets again," he added.

Following the terrorist attack, the UN withdrew 90% of its staff from Iraq - of the 645 who where in the country prior to 19 August, only 66 remain.

A UN official, back from an assessment mission in Iraq last week, told European Voice that a further small reduction in numbers was very likely.

"There is pressure in New York to withdraw them all," he said. "If we or the coalition cannot ensure their security, they should not stay."

The UN staff in Iraq hold security evaluation meetings at least every two days. They could decide to leave without even consulting the organization's headquarters. "Many in New York claim they should have left already," the official said. "There is a huge fear of a second attack."

MEP Emma Nicholson, the European Parliament's rapporteur on Iraq, is concerned about the mounting pressure for assigning a bigger role in Iraq to the UN, even though the organization is not requesting it. "I don't like the idea of the UN being forced into a position to take a role that it does not seek.

"Kofi Annan [its secretary-general] is not requesting it and the UN is wise in holding back."

Nicholson, who is also the World Health Organization's envoy to the Middle East, says the UN should not allow itself to be bullied into taking on a bigger role. "I am absolutely certain that Iraq will take care of its own affairs soon. Why force the UN in?"

A European Commission DG Relex official feels the UN is right to be reluctant. "The UN does not want to be given a toy which has been broken. A few Pandora's Boxes have been opened in Iraq, a few things have been damaged. It is understandable that the UN is not enthusiastic about it."

However, it is clear the UN will have to find a balance between protecting its own staff and defending the interests of Iraqis. "In the end, we will have to see what is the best, or the least bad option, for the people down there," the UN official said.