HALF OF ONE FOR FOUR IS GOOD ENOUGH

Iraq: Why the US should let the UN take over (Stephen Zunes, 8/02/03, Asia Times)

Four theses on a campaign that could use opportunities created by the invasion and occupation of Iraq in a creative way: a campaign to turn the administration of Iraq over to the United Nations:

1. A United Nations administration would be more likely to bring peace and stability to Iraq. [...]

2. Turning over control of Iraq to the UN would be in the best interests of Americans.

American soldiers continue to die every week in Iraq. American deaths since the end of formal hostilities will likely soon surpass those killed during the war itself. The consultative council appointed by US occupation forces appears to have little power or credibility among the population and Iraq appears to be a long way from genuine self-governance. It is unlikely that the Bush administration will be able to bring to power a new Iraqi regime that has the support of the majority of the Iraqi people.

The ongoing US occupation of Iraq, particularly the killings of Iraqi civilians by American soldiers, is resulting in the growth of anti-American sentiment throughout the Arab and Islamic world. This could increase the ranks of extremist groups like the terrorist al-Qaeda network, whose leaders are now more easily able to portray the United States as an imperialist power committed to the conquest and subjugation of Muslim peoples and the exploitation of the region's natural resources. This would be far more difficult to do, however, if Iraq were instead provisionally governed by an international regime under UN auspices.

The 150,000 American troops currently deployed in Iraq are causing a shortage of available personnel for other potential US military operations, ranging from peacekeeping operations in Liberia (which could help save that country from a humanitarian disaster) to challenging real threats to regional security (such as North Korea, which - unlike Iraq - really is developing weapons of mass destruction). In addition, the need for a large number of reservists to fill the ranks of US occupation forces are having a detrimental impact on many thousands of families and businesses back home that depend on them.

In addition, the US occupation is expensive. Currently, the American taxpayer is paying for more than 85 percent of the costs of the post-war occupation, peacekeeping, and administration in Iraq. Under UN leadership, US contributions would be no more than 20 percent, a major savings for the American taxpayer that would make available funding for badly needed social services at home, as well as tax relief and deficit reduction.

3. The United Nations could succeed in such an effort. [...]

4. Such a campaign is winnable. [...]

Reasons one, three, and four range from dubious to wrong, but a portion of number 2 is right--the rest of the world should be paying the costs and our trioops are of more use destabilizing regimes than trying to create new ones--so let's ditch the problem and get on to creating a new one in Damascus. Posted by Orrin Judd at August 3, 2003 5:53 PM