UNSC resolution 1511 passes 15-0

[lord of the mark]

CNN

[Dinner]

Exactly what changes were made from the original one which didn't pass?

[The diplomat]

Another victory for the Bush diplomacy!

[MikeH]

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by MikeH

Why are you laughing? Everyone said that the Bush administration was alienating France and Germany. There was talk that the "anti-war" countries would not support a UN resolution dealing with Iraq. Yet, I see France, Germany and Russia voting yes, supporting the US-backed UN resolution. And I see a 15-0 vote in favor of the US proposal. Looks pretty good to me!

[Menlas]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Another victory for the Bush diplomacy!

Oxy-moron inside

[Q Classic]

a victory for bush diplomacy because he gave them pretty much what they wanted? well, ok, if you say so...

[MikeH]

Originally posted by The diplomat Why are you laughing? Everyone said that the Bush administration was alienating France and Germany. There was talk that the "anti-war" countries would not support a UN resolution dealing with Iraq. Yet, I see France, Germany and Russia voting yes, supporting the US-backed UN resolution. And I see a 15-0 vote in favor of the US proposal. Looks pretty good to me!

Yeah, Bush kissed arse and caved into France and Germany's demands on the resolution very well.

[lord of the mark]

what France and germany asked for was a timetable for turning over soveriegnty to Iraqis, with a deadline of a few months (which would mean BEFORE a constitution and elections). And to have the UN running things till then.

What they got - a deadline of December 15 for the Iraqi governing council to release a SCHEDULE for a new constitution and elections, to be followed by the hand over of sovereinty when the elections take place. The UN WILL have a role in the constition writing and election process, but the Coalition will remain sovereign till the Iraqis become sovereign, and the coalition will (IIUC) retain a role in constitution writing. Oh, and one "concession" the US made to the UN was that UN staffers dont HAVE TO show up if they think its not safe

Sounds like the US/UK got 80% of what they wanted, the French-Germans got 20% of what they wanted. How'd we do this? by somehow (one suspects threats and bribes were involved, as well as a general desire to move things forward) got over the weekend the support of all the non-muslim non-permanent members. That meant we could pass resolution 10-0 (given that france and russia had already said they wouldnt veto) And we said we would, and didnt care about a weak looking majority - so you want on board, got to get on board now. We then sucked up to Russia, and made some specific changes to accomodate them. Yesterday Russia, China and Pakistan all said theyd vote yes. France and Germany apparently werent eager to be isolated beside Syria, and caved. Whats particularly striking is that even Syria voted yes rather than abstaining - just a few days ago it was expected that Syria would vote no.

[lord of the mark]

here's what the BBC says about the resolution

"The broad shape of the resolution that was put to the vote has not changed dramatically.

The resolution confirms that for the time being the Coalition Provisional Authority will remain the over-arching power in Iraq, although it stresses that the transfer of sovereignty and government back to the Iraqi people will happen as soon as practicable.

The United Nations is promised a strengthened vital role in the political and economic reconstruction process, but only as circumstances, particularly security, permit.

Still missing is a clear timetable, with dates, for a transfer of power and anything like the more dominant role that the UN had sought, our correspondent says.

But the resolution asks Iraqi leaders to draw up a plan for a new constitution and elections by 15 December. "

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Another victory for the Bush diplomacy!

Another implies more than one.

[Q Classic]

spin it how you want to. i still don't understand why you're calling it a "victory" for bush diplomacy.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
spin it how you want to. i still don't understand why you're calling it a "victory" for bush diplomacy.

I didnt call it that - i dont know if it was a victory for Bush diplomacy, or Powell diplomacy, or Blair diplomacy, or Jack Straw diplomacy, or maybe even Vlad Putin diplomacy . But it is quite clear that we didnt give them close to what they asked for, and probably not close to what they wanted (but who knows what they really wanted - what they asked for could have just been bluff, no?)

[lord of the mark]

In fact the French and Germans are still saying it was not a good resolution.

CNN:

'Jean-Marc de la Sabliere, French ambassador to the United Nations, said the resolution could have gone further.

"It would have been desirable, in particular, for a clear-cut text to set timetables for transfer of responsibility and political transition," he said.

Gunter Pleuger, Germany's U.N. ambassador, said, "Although we consider the resolution to be an important step in the right direction," it could have been a better resolution if amendments proposed by France, Russia and Germany were "fully integrated."

"We missed a clear signal that transfer of sovereignty to Iraqis will be accelerated," Pleuger said. "The role of the United Nations, in particular of the secretary-general, could have been strengthened even more." '

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
spin it how you want to. i still don't understand why you're calling it a "victory" for bush diplomacy.

OK lets make it simple - we proposed a resolution. France, Germany and Russia got up in public and proposed something completely different. Kofi Annan said (in essence) the US/UK resolution was no good. The US made a few changes that - according to the BBC, confirmed by the French and German ambassadors, - left the resolution largely unchanged - and the resolution then passed 15 - 0 with the affirmative votes of France, Germany and Russia, and even of Syria.