Only the UN can save us

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1211428,00.html

Just when things could not get any worse in Iraq, they do. The Washington Post's disgusting new pictures yesterday presage as many more horror stories as there are civilians randomly killed and people imprisoned or disappeared without explanation. Desperate families outside jails, waving bits of paper with names and begging for news, have had their pleas ignored for a year by the powers that invaded on a promise to bring the rule of law and human rights. The systematic torture of prisoners in Abu Ghraib and elsewhere is so poisonous in its symbolism that not even America's mortal enemies could have devised such a PR coup. Sexual abuse and humiliation of naked Muslim prisoners, urinated on and sodomised, and orders from US intelligence to "soften up" victims in Saddam's old torture chamber almost defies belief.

Few of us who argued against this war imagined things would be this bad. As the president begs Congress for another $25bn in the shadow of this chaos, the rubble of neo-conservative strategy lies all about him. The dream that this expedition would herald a new era of democracy across the Middle East is dead on his lips. Essential contractors have quit as insurance brokers declare Iraq the most dangerous place in the world to business. A Gallup poll in Baghdad, taken just before the torture pictures appeared, showed only 10% of Iraqis had a favourable opinion of the US.

The neo-conservative dream of total American hegemony without need of allies or international law has been exposed as impossible as well as undesirable. All this causes much smirking satisfaction in the more rabid anti-American camp. But the effect of an Iraq meltdown could have ominous global repercussions. A US retreat into isolationism is no answer. The US is only superpower: the UN and the world have as much need of it as ever for humanitarian interventions.

For all its need of reform, the UN is all there is, and Brahimi is Iraq's last best hope. If Tony Blair wants to save what is left of his fearful Iraq error, now is the time for him to put loud pressure on Bush to guarantee the UN a central role after the June 30 handover, with command over the military, and drawing in Turkey and Arab nations under a UN banner. All prisoners must be handed over to UN authority to be dealt with transparently under international law. Otherwise Blair should warn that Britain will follow Spain, Bulgaria and Poland in ordering a withdrawal of troops. Demanding a UN handover is his last chance to do the right thing.

power, and a big role in the Carlyle republican world organization, headed by papa bush and to be passed down to little georgie. Tony, like Colin Powell, are intereted in their future wealth and self power.

Sadly, the UN has no teeth...and every time they get attacked, they pull back. It has happened time and time again. I'm concerned that if the US does pull back and the UN moves in, what happens if their headquarters gets bombed again? I'm afraid they will leave as they have done in the past...then what? The country would be screwed. We only have two options...pull out completely and watch a civil war erupt, or stay in the country, keep pissing off Iraqis, and keep taking heavy casualties. Quite a mess either way.

if the UN took over, but only if the US leaves. Behind the scene, wicket bush has been giving some ground to the UN. He doesn't want to bee seen as cutting and running. After giving Fallugah to Saddam's bad ass military soldiers, you know bush will do anything to look as if he's winning....and winning the elections abroad.

The only good thing wicket bush has done is to unite the different religious sects, and knowing how destroyed their country is, they will not seek to go into a civil war among themselves. They need each other, and need the backing of world leaders. Iraqis for sure don't need the US. Thanks but no thanks!

...as the US ceding power to the UN. However, as the article states, "The neo-conservatives dream of total American hegemony without need of allies or international law." In other words they will not do any such thing without one heck of a struggle.

I've kinda come to the conclusion that successful regime change in Iraq will require regime change in Britain and America first I'm afraid.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.