At last a sustantive plan for
ending the war in Iraq
By
Jonathan
Power
TFF
Associate since 1991
Comments directly to
JonatPower@aol.com
August 23, 2007
LONDON - Everybody out! Surely that is the only answer for Iraq. The trouble is- among all the other troubles- that no one has a plan. At best we have vague ideas- a pull back but leaving troops in their bases to do training work, a conference with the interested neighbours, or a break up of Iraq into its constituent ethnic and religious parts. Where do we go from there, wherever “there” is, remains unanswered. Neither Brussels, Moscow, Beijing nor the UN Secretary-General has come up with a plan. Even the anti-war movements have come up with zilch. They have failed as peace movements.
Rather bravely, if belatedly too, Sweden’s Transnational Foundation for Peace and Future Research (TFF) has come out with a plan. (Although I am an [unpaid] associate of the foundation I have had no say in the plan’s drafting.)
It begins with a telling observation, “ As long as the overall perspective is concentrated on how bad and wrong everything is, it is a safe hypothesis that there will be either no withdrawal or an even worse situation after such a withdrawal… Withdrawal is not likely until many more citizens around the world can see alternatives to occupation. Elise Boulding has eloquently stated that what people can’t envision, they are not likely to fight for.” A “withdraw-and-forget” policy à la Vietnam would be the worst and most dangerous policy.
TFF suggests that we have to establish an international peacebuilding mission under UN leadership. This will not be “just another UN mission”. It will be of a fundamentally new type. Its main ingredients must be- a clear and comprehensive mandate giving the UN control with funding secured for a least five years at the onset; partnership with influential organizations, such as the Arab League, the European Union and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, as well as non-governmental organizations; 100,000 UN troops (I would double this figure) of which 15% will be acting under a robust command, as laid out in Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, 25% will be police and 60% will be civilian-humanitarian workers. No military personnel will be recruited from countries that have been occupiers and a majority will come from non-Western countries. Countries with sophisticated armies like India, France, Japan and Brazil must play a leading role.
This will be the largest ever UN mission. “It must be big enough so that it can do the job, but not so big that the Iraqis will feel that it is a new occupation”. The mission must strike a balance between the traditional “heavyweight” activities such as the military, law, institution building and physical re-building and “lightweight” people-orientated elements, such as working directly on reconciliation, forgiveness, human healing, neighbourhood-regeneration, schooling, health and psychiatric care.
The UN would work through two new Iraqi bodies appointed by the Iraqi government – a reconstruction and development council run by Iraqi professionals and technocrats with support from the UN and a national security council that will oversee defence, interior affairs intelligence and national security.
Added to this there should be a South Africa-style Truth and Reconciliation Commission so that those accused of wrongdoing can find a way to clean the sheet by owning up publicly to their crimes.
Remembering what the supposed reason was for the American-British invasion- to root out weapons of mass destruction- the UN should resolve to insist that the Middle East become a zone free of such weapons. The U.S. and Britain should also make Iraq a hefty endowment to compensate for all the destruction they have brought about, just as Iraq was compelled to aid Kuwait after the first Gulf War. This would amount to at least $250 billion.
The whole effort will demand a high-class team of high-powered international diplomats who have earned a reputation for impartiality and the ability to empathize with both sides in a conflict. Fortunately over the years the UN has built up a cadre of these- Kofi Annan could be one.
Here is a plan that will require not just American and British consent but active support from all over. It needs the full weight of the European Union and real credible backing from Moscow and Beijing. (Does Washington realize how fortunate it is that thus far Moscow has not meddled in Iraq?). It also demands that the rest of the world pull their weight too- with troops, professionals and finance.
Nearly ever country in the world has a vested interest in making sure that Iraq does not go from bad to worse, that Iraq doesn’t become a major recruiting ground and front for Al-Qaeda.
For those who have doubts they should re-read the UN Charter. It was written with situations like this clearly in mind- when such is the hell that only the combined will and willingness of mankind can rectify the destruction being done.
Copyright © 2007 Jonathan
Power
Last
Next
Jonathan Power can be
reached by phone +44 7785 351172
and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
Jonathan
Power
2007 Book
Conundrums
of Humanity
The Quest for Global Justice
“Conundrums
of Humanity” poses eleven questions for our future progress, ranging
from “Can we diminish War?” to “How far and fast can
we push forward the frontiers of Human Rights?” to “Will
China dominate the century?”
The answers to these questions, the author believes, growing out of
his long experience as a foreign correspondent and columnist for the
International Herald Tribune, are largely positive ones, despite the
hurdles yet to be overcome. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, London, 2007.
Tell a friend about this column by Jonathan Power
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
Get
free articles & updates
|