![]() Monday, Apr 21, 2003 |
| International | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | International
By Sridhar Krishnaswami
Nothing final has emerged from either the State Department or the White House on how the U.S. is going to tackle the issue; and there are enough indications that there is a split within the administration itself on how to go about the task. After talking tough initially that the U.S. would not mind going without the U.N. in humanitarian aid and reconstruction assistance, the U.S. is keen on sparing tax payers anymore they absolutely have to shell out. It wants Iraqi oil revenues to pay for the reconstruction and rehabilitation, in the medium and in the longer terms. For the immediate, the Congress has already authorised some $2.5 billions and the first bids have already been allocated under the fast track scheme. Washington is quite aware that the task of removing Iraqi sanctions is highly complicated and if the game is not played well and carefully, post-war Iraq will be subjected to billions of dollars in lawsuits that will undoubtedly complicate matters. But the legal dimension is only one aspect of the larger challenge to this Republican administration the political angle coming first. The U.S. is aware that removing sanctions is going to take literally months and in the meantime is said to be contemplating a number of steps. For instance, one perception is that Washington could seek a resolution in the Security Council in the near future on a Statement of Principles which among other things will reinforce the territorial sovereignty of Iraq and respect to human rights as the core elements of an emerging political landscape. It could then take the lead role in renewing resolution 1472 that deals with a massive U.N. humanitarian programme which expires on May 12. As an interim measure, this will be extended to June 3 when the first six-month phase of the Oil-for-Food programme runs out. The third step, some maintain, will see the U.S. taking on "tougher issues" such as the linkages between oil sales and humanitarian relief. Under the existing scheme of things Iraq is allowed to buy food and humanitarian goods in the oil-for-food programme. The Iraqi Oil Ministry used to decide to whom oil is going to be sold; and the United Nations had to approve of the purchase list.
A major hurdle
Analysts in the media and elsewhere have been pointing to a major hurdle in the way of the Security Council lifting sanctions: U.N. weapons inspectors must certify that Iraq is free of all weapons of mass destruction. The real complication is not just that there are no U.N. weapons inspectors inside Iraq at this time the Bush administration has recruited the former U.N. weapons inspectors to find them.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|