France on the UN and Post-War Iraq

Sand

I heard on the news that France ( yet again ) has said it will veto any resolution giving the US and Britain administrative control in post war Iraq. Two questions.

1) Have they not been paying attention this week?
2) Do they really believe the allies are going to ask the permisson of those wholly opposed to the liberation to administrate Iraq prior to a democratic government being installed?

Im no fan of the UN as it stands, havent been for a long while - but I must admit its a bit weird seeing it dying like this, with the French still living in a time warp.

mike65

If the US is being willfully beligerant then the French are
being deliberatly unhelpful. They're gonna be a much of a pain in ass as is posible from now on, until the cent drops and they realise the US simply is'nt going to listen to them. BTW have the US/UK said they want admin of Iraq?

Meanwhile in the trenches at Wapping...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,919003,00.html

Mike.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Cork

Originally posted by daveirl
France's problem is that the UKUSA want to have their cake and eat it. They want the UN to do all the humanitarian donkey work but they want Gen. Tommy Franks to run the show.

France want the UN to do the whole thing. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I don't either. In the immediate aftermath of the war. Iraqis will need health care and housing. They will also need security aganist their neighbouring countries.

As long as the job gets done and the lot of the average Iraqi improves - this should be the focus.

Who ever is involved will only be transitional - as I hope Iraq gets full democracy. But - I would have a preference for the UN - as the UN would be accepted more by the other Arab nations.

bonkey

Originally posted by Sand
Im no fan of the UN as it stands, havent been for a long while - but I must admit its a bit weird seeing it dying like this, with the French still living in a time warp.

My guess is that the French and Russians are taking somewhat complimentary stances designed to show how they are still willing to work entirely within the aurpices of the UN, but that those rebel US and UK nations are the ones making a mockery of it.

In this instance, I think they're trying to force the US and UK to declare administrative control of Iraq without consulting the UN. The US could counter this by saying "but with a French veto, it would be pointless to use the UN - they have made a mockery of the process". The Russians will then counter this in turn, by pointing out teh motion they are trying to get tabled, which (by that stage, in their plans) the US or UK will have vetoed, and will ask the worlds' media and public to laugh themselves silly at the hypocracy of the US and UK.

I dont think it will work, but thats my current take on why they're doing what they are doing.

jc

mike65

bonkey, thats so covoluted, so cunning and so French it sounds entirely pausible!

Mike.

Biffa Bacon

My personal preference would be for the Axis of Weasels to be completely shut out of any reconstruction of Iraq. If that entails ignoring the UN then so be it.

Cork

Originally posted by Biffa Bacon
My personal preference would be for the Axis of Weasels to be completely shut out of any reconstruction of Iraq. If that entails ignoring the UN then so be it.

France And Germay are not the UN or the EU.

Their involvement - no metter what interim administration that will be decided upon will be limited.

I still think the UN would be more accepted by Arab Nations.

Sand

In this instance, I think they're trying to force the US and UK to declare administrative control of Iraq without consulting the UN. The US could counter this by saying "but with a French veto, it would be pointless to use the UN - they have made a mockery of the process". The Russians will then counter this in turn, by pointing out teh motion they are trying to get tabled, which (by that stage, in their plans) the US or UK will have vetoed, and will ask the worlds' media and public to laugh themselves silly at the hypocracy of the US and UK.

The Russian proposal is where they want to declare the current war illegal isnt it? I dont think its going to get to a veto stage because theyd need at least 9 votes and I dont think there are that many looking to *really* burn their bridges with the US, and the US could play the hypocrities game twice over by bringing Chechnya up and asking the UN to demonstrate its moral cause by expelling the russians and bringing down sanctions on them in response to their crimes in Checnya. That would pretty much split the anti-US alliance in the security council and lead to some very interesting jusitifications about why Russia doesnt deserve punishment for its forces adventures there.

And if the UN position is that the war is illegal - surely the UNs position would be that Iraq should then be returned to its previous ruler - Saddam Hussein? Or is international law that advanced?

Originally posted by Cork
In the immediate aftermath of the war. Iraqis will need health care and housing.

Micheál Martin will look after that for them, we should send him over:D
Seriously though, expect the lions share of the more profitable and handy re-construction to go to U.S and U.K companies.

France have turned their dreams of getting the most worthwhile stuff and of course, the oil contracts to Chi - Rack and Ruin.

mm

Barry Aldwell

Originally posted by Man
Micheál Martin will look after that for them, we should send him over:D

Maybe we should staple an American Flag to his ass and mail him to Baghdad. If he survives until the Americans get there then he should replace Bertie as Taoiseach.