The Axis of Weasels is having a summit meeting in St. Petersburg. Russia, Germany and France meeting to discuss how they can salvage their economic interests in Iraq.
Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is history, some of his staunchest defenders will convene today in St. Petersburg, Russia, to discuss ways to minimize the role played by Iraq's leading liberator, the United States, in that nation's postwar recovery. The three leaders who will convene in St. Peterburg ? Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac ? are smarting from their failure to derail President Bush's effort to get the United Nations to enforce its own resolutions requiring Iraqi disarmament. By forming a coalition to get the job done outside U.N. auspices, Mr. Bush demonstrated that, when it comes to disarming rogue states, the United Nations is an abysmal failure.
Having failed to prevent Washington from acting to disarm Iraq and free its people from Saddam's tyrannical regime, France, Germany and Russia want to ensure a large role for the United Nations at Washington's expense in rebuilding Iraq. In fact, the United States, under retired Army Gen. Jay Garner, is putting together a team of more than 100 officials from the United States and Britain to oversee postwar reconstruction in Iraq. Gen. Garner is wildly popular with many Iraqis for the job he did in administering Kurdish areas of Iraq following the 1991 Gulf War.
In contrast to the United States, which has liberated both Kuwait and Iraq from Saddam Hussein, the United Nations has no moral claim to any central role in rebuilding Iraq. It refused to enforce 16 Security Council resolutions requiring that Iraq rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and stop brutalizing its own people. Yet, that's exactly what the new Moscow-Paris-Berlin axis ? three governments that advocated a prolonged and useless U.N. inspection regime in an effort to prevent military action to disarm Saddam Hussein ? are pushing for. Ever since the war began and the fate of the Iraqi regime was sealed, M. Chirac and French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin have become particularly vocal in demanding a major role for the United Nations in Iraq. M. Chirac, for example, declared that France would veto any Security Council resolution that would "legitimize the military intervention" by the United States and Britain and give those nations the right to administer Iraq.
But, a U.N.-controlled postwar administration in Iraq "would merely serve as a Trojan horse for European nations opposed to regime change, enabling them to stake their economic and strategic claims in Iraq," notes Heritage Foundation analyst Nile Gardiner. "The spectacle of French or Russian bureaucrats, who for decades have tried to keep a brutal dictator in power, ruling over the Iraqi people, would be utterly abhorrent."
We agree. The United States and Britain deserve primary roles in administering postwar Iraq. Moreover, the Iraqi people deserve a level of technical competence and moral guidance that the United Nations is manifestly incapable of providing. Any U.N. role ought to be secondary and limited to providing humanitarian assistance.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030411-701955.htm
Now that Saddam Hussein's regime is history, some of his staunchest defenders will convene today in St. Petersburg, Russia, to discuss ways to minimize the role played by Iraq's leading liberator, the United States, in that nation's postwar recovery. The three leaders who will convene in St. Peterburg ? Russian President Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac ? are smarting from their failure to derail President Bush's effort to get the United Nations to enforce its own resolutions requiring Iraqi disarmament. By forming a coalition to get the job done outside U.N. auspices, Mr. Bush demonstrated that, when it comes to disarming rogue states, the United Nations is an abysmal failure.
Having failed to prevent Washington from acting to disarm Iraq and free its people from Saddam's tyrannical regime, France, Germany and Russia want to ensure a large role for the United Nations at Washington's expense in rebuilding Iraq. In fact, the United States, under retired Army Gen. Jay Garner, is putting together a team of more than 100 officials from the United States and Britain to oversee postwar reconstruction in Iraq. Gen. Garner is wildly popular with many Iraqis for the job he did in administering Kurdish areas of Iraq following the 1991 Gulf War.
In contrast to the United States, which has liberated both Kuwait and Iraq from Saddam Hussein, the United Nations has no moral claim to any central role in rebuilding Iraq. It refused to enforce 16 Security Council resolutions requiring that Iraq rid itself of weapons of mass destruction and stop brutalizing its own people. Yet, that's exactly what the new Moscow-Paris-Berlin axis ? three governments that advocated a prolonged and useless U.N. inspection regime in an effort to prevent military action to disarm Saddam Hussein ? are pushing for. Ever since the war began and the fate of the Iraqi regime was sealed, M. Chirac and French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin have become particularly vocal in demanding a major role for the United Nations in Iraq. M. Chirac, for example, declared that France would veto any Security Council resolution that would "legitimize the military intervention" by the United States and Britain and give those nations the right to administer Iraq.
But, a U.N.-controlled postwar administration in Iraq "would merely serve as a Trojan horse for European nations opposed to regime change, enabling them to stake their economic and strategic claims in Iraq," notes Heritage Foundation analyst Nile Gardiner. "The spectacle of French or Russian bureaucrats, who for decades have tried to keep a brutal dictator in power, ruling over the Iraqi people, would be utterly abhorrent."
We agree. The United States and Britain deserve primary roles in administering postwar Iraq. Moreover, the Iraqi people deserve a level of technical competence and moral guidance that the United Nations is manifestly incapable of providing. Any U.N. role ought to be secondary and limited to providing humanitarian assistance.
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030411-701955.htm
