Thursday, Mar 27, 2003
Thursday, Mar 27, 2003 |
| International | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | International
By Sridhar Krishnaswami
Iraqis greet Royal Marines who brought the first humanitarian aid to Umm Qasr, southern Iraq, on Wednesday.
The session which is expected to last until Thursday will see several delegates giving `speeches' and if the past is anything to go by, most will be condemning the stance of the United States and Britain on Iraq. And in the present instance, most speakers will be calling for an immediate end to the conflict. At this stage, it is not clear if the 15-member Security Council will be pushing for a formal resolution at the end of this open session calling for an end to the hostilities and withdrawal of all foreign forces. Those in favour of such a resolution will have to first make sure they have nine votes to pass the resolution. Even then the U. S. and Britain will most certainly exercise their veto. One scenario is that if a resolution is killed by a veto in the Security Council, the Arab League could call for an Emergency Session of the 191-member United Nations General Assembly. To get this going, a petition signed by at least 97 States is required. This will not be difficult; and the chances of a resolution condemning the U.S.- led attack on Iraq passing the General Assembly is also high given the existing sentiments. A resolution cannot be vetoed in the General Assembly. At the same time, resolutions are not legally binding unlike the case of the Security Council, but are seen as reflecting the views of the world opinion. The special session of the Security Council comes at a time when the Bush administration and the United Nations have been discussing at some length on what is required in Iraq in the post-conflict stage, over and beyond the realm of humanitarian assistance. In the immediate context, all eyes are on Basra where a humanitarian catastrophe is said to be on the cards with large parts of that area without water or food and in dire sanitation conditions.
Rice meets Annan
On Tuesday, the National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, met the U.N. Secretary General, Kofi Annan and discussed a number of issues pertaining to Iraq including the Oil-for-Food programme and humanitarian assistance. Mr. Annan is believed to have told Dr. Rice that until such time security conditions allowed the safe return of United Nations staff, the U.S. was responsible for humanitarian relief. Major nations such as France, Russia and China who were miffed at the fashion in which Britain and the U.S. have gone about Iraq are insistent that any and all humanitarian relief in Iraq must be shouldered by the U.S., not the United Nations. Further, there are several Security Council members who are taking the position that any revamping of the Oil-for-Food programme should not be done in a manner that gives Washington control of the billions of dollars in the United Nations escrow account. The Bush administration is making the point that if the United Nations does not get involved in the humanitarian sphere in Iraq immediately, the U.S. is perfectly capable of going about it on its own. In fact, the White House has been stressing that the Saddam Hussein regime is hampering the flow of more than 100 million in U.S. relief by mining the port of Umm Qasr which is now emerging as a key point in the Persian Gulf.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
