Draft UN resolution and Iraq's sovereignty

However, the draft resolution raises more questions than it resolves. One cannot but be chary of the possibilities that post 30 June 2004 handover, and even post 2005 election that is envisaged in the handover plan, may still leave Iraq with very much an abridged sovereignty, under the control of the US, legalised by a UN mandate.

For example, the draft resolution is quite ambiguous, if not silent, about the exit of the multinational forces (MNF) that would be in place through a UN mandate, under stipulations of the new resolution. Even more opaque are the composition, command and control arrangements and scope of operations of this force. There is also a large question mark of the writ of the Interim Government on the MNF. Even the British and the US have different responses on this issue.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

One is also not certain if the prospective troops contributing countries would be inclined to provide troops to the MNF whose composition would largely be that of the current occupation forces. One would also hesitate to call it a UN mission in Iraq when in fact it would really be a continued existence of the occupation forces under a changed name only.

Both France and Russia have expressed their reservations while China has suggested changes to the draft that echoes their concerns. We feel that these suggestions merit serious consideration of the Council.

Many aspects of the draft would have to be clarified by the two major powers if they want to dispel the common perception that the new resolution would not be occupation under another name.