The following is an archived copy of a message sent to the CASI Analysis List run by Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of Cambridge Solidarity with Iraq (CASI).
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [CASI Homepage]
[ This message has been sent to you via the CASI-analysis mailing list ] My understanding is that any proposal that the UN comes up with will already have been vetted by the US. The US is still going to be the real power in Iraq anyway. Iraq will not have control over security. The US will with UN blessing. Also, the transitional government will be bound by laws passed by IGC. The UN is simply being used by the US as a tool to provide a facade of international legitimacy for the transitional government. The US motto is: not necessarily the UN but the UN if necessary. The UN was necessary to impose sanctions but was not necessary for the invasion....but it may now be necessary...oh yes and relevant..to legitimize the transitional govt. Cheers, Ken Hanly ----- Original Message ----- From: "Yasser Alaskary" <email@example.com> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 10:58 PM Subject: [casi-analysis] The UN Trojan Horse > [ This message has been sent to you via the CASI-analysis mailing list ] > > Analysis brought to you by the Iraqi Prospect Organization: > http://www.iprospect.org.uk/na22apr.html > > > The UN Trojan Horse > > By Sama Hadad > Thursday, April 22, 2004 > > Calls for the United Nations to be given a substantial role in Iraq are > mounting. With the planned withdrawal of Spanish troops and the ongoing > violence in parts of the country, President Bush is under increasing > pressure to involve the UN. Bowing to such pressure will undoubtedly have > far reaching consequences for Iraq's democratization. > > Following the end of World War I the British established Iraq as a country > that was ruled by Sunni Arabs; this minority dominated both the military and > the government. This rule of a minority over a majority provided the > foundations for Saddam Hussein's rise to power and decades of Iraqi > suffering. So when Ambassador Bremer decreed last year to disband the Iraqi > army and ban high ranking members of the Ba'ath Party from public office, he > put an end to the legacy of minority rule in Iraq. This historic event was > only matched by the formation of the Governing Council which, for the first > time in Iraq's history, was a body that fairly represented Iraq's ethnic > makeup. Ever since, these decisions have been the scourge of proponents of > minority rule who have sought to undo them at every opportunity. > > The latest assault came from the United Nation's Special Envoy, Lakhdar > Brahimi, former undersecretary of the Arab League. His proposal for a new > transitional Iraqi government, cloaked in the legitimacy of the UN, is in an > attempt to undo the historic achievements of the past year. > > The June 30 deadline is fast approaching and it is still unclear as to what > sort of transitional government will guide Iraq to elections in January > 2005. Currently, the strongest proposal on the table is for the expansion of > the existing Iraqi Governing Council. Instead, Brahimi wants to scrap the > body, and with it the fixed percentages that ensure fair representation for > each ethnic group. In its place he wants a caretaker government, effectively > appointed by the UN, and a national conference to choose a consultative > assembly. > > Making such sweeping changes for an authority that will _______________________________________ Sent via the CASI-analysis mailing list To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-analysis All postings are archived on CASI's website at http://www.casi.org.uk