Bush Pushes U.N. to Lift Iraq Sanctions

President Bush urged the Security Council on Wednesday to lift sanctions on Iraq that have been in place for a dozen years, implicitly challenging its members not to allow their objections to the war to hinder the Persian Gulf nation’s speedy recovery.

“Now that Iraq is liberated, the United Nations should lift economic sanctions on that country,” Bush told workers at a Boeing plant in St. Louis that built fighter jets used against Iraq.

But France, Russia and some other council members are arguing to keep the sanctions in place and let the U.N. retain control of Iraq’s oil resources and lucrative contracts to rebuild the nation. They fear that a U.S.-installed government will cut them out of existing and future deals. French President Jacques Chirac told Bush by telephone Tuesday -- their first conversation in nearly two months -- that France wants the U.N. to have a more central role in rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure and government than Washington would like.

Last week, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell dismissed calls by France, Russia and Germany for a central U.N. role in Iraq, noting that the American-led coalition had overthrown Saddam Hussein, and that the idea that “the Security Council is now going to become responsible for everything is incorrect.”

Addressing Iraq’s humanitarian needs may seem like a straightforward way for the Security Council to reunite after months of discord. But how the group deals with the sanctions has profound portents for the future of both Iraq and the U.N. If not handled carefully, the issue could potentially deepen divisions.

In the coming weeks, the council’s 15 members must resolve several weighty questions: How should the U.S. and Britain share the burden and the spoils of shaping a new Iraq? Who should control the country and its resources until a new Iraqi government is in place? Does the U.N. need to certify that Iraq is truly disarmed -- or that it even had banned weapons in the first place -- before sanctions can be lifted?

“To us, all these questions are linked,” said a French diplomat. “It is in the interest of the Iraqi people, the [U.S.-led war] coalition and the international community to do this right. There are no shortcuts.”

The Security Council’s actions also may foreshadow the future of U.S. dealings with the world body. If the council blocks American intentions, it will make Washington much more wary of engaging the U.N. on crucial security decisions, U.S. officials say.

“Working out these issues could take months. In the meantime, you have oil sitting in port and people to feed,” said a U.S. official who requested anonymity. “The rebuilding can’t wait for the political bickering to end.”

The U.N. imposed strict economic sanctions beginning in 1990 in response to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and to pressure the regime to surrender weapons of mass destruction. In 1996, the world body eased the restrictions to allow countries to buy oil and sell nonmilitary goods to Iraq, but all contracts had to be approved by a U.N. committee, and all revenue was held in an escrow account in a bid to keep the money out of Hussein’s hands. Though the regime is now gone, the elaborate web of sanctions still exists -- tripping up U.S. plans to fund reconstruction with Iraqi oil revenues.

Iraq’s oil fields escaped major damage or sabotage during the war, and until the last several days the country continued to pump oil from its northern fields through a pipeline to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. The tanks there are now full, with 9.3 million barrels waiting to be shipped, said Ian Steele, spokesman for the U.N.’s “oil-for-food” program. But buyers need a confirmation certificate from the Iraqi government to allow loading -- and no one is sure who has that authority. Under international conventions, occupying powers are not allowed to make long-term contracts.

“The oil is available,” said Steele, “but until the legal and political issues are resolved, no one can take it.”

In his St. Louis address, Bush did not spell out when or how to go about lifting sanctions. But White House Deputy Press Secretary Scott McClellan told reporters that the U.S. would seek a resolution to lift them “in the near future.”

At the United Nations, diplomats are speaking wryly about the sudden flip-flop of interests. For years, France and Russia have pushed to ease economic restrictions on Iraq, both to open up investment opportunities for their companies and to improve the lot of the Iraqi people. The U.S. and Britain have argued to keep the pressure on.

Now, it’s the other way around.

“The U.S. used to say to the Russians and the French, ‘We’ll lift sanctions over my dead body,’ ” said an ambassador at the world body. “Now the Russians and the French are saying that to the U.S.”

Although technically the Security Council can override the cumbersome requirements of any previous resolution, the majority of members want to lift the sanctions by the book. That means that U.N. inspectors must certify that Iraq is free of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons before the council officially rescinds the sanctions.

“The sanctions were imposed to ensure that Iraq does not possess weapons of mass destruction,” said Mexican Ambassador Adolfo Aguilar Zinser, the council’s president. “There is a great deal of interest in the council to finalize this issue.”

The U.S. has teams seeking caches of banned weapons and is recruiting former and current U.N. inspectors to work under American supervision at an estimated 3,000 sites. But Washington, saying it was disappointed by the results of U.N.-run inspections before the war, has resisted inviting the world body’s inspectors back into the country to monitor the efforts. Council members say the presence of U.N. teams would help U.S. credibility, and have asked chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix to meet with the council Tuesday.

But Wednesday, U.S. Ambassador John D. Negroponte questioned whether inspections were still required. “We have to recognize that the situation in the region has changed radically, and I don’t know if [the inspections process] is necessary or not.”

In an effort to help mend the council’s rift, Secretary-General Kofi Annan joined a European Union summit in Athens on Wednesday to meet with leaders from Britain and Spain, who supported the war effort, and from Russia and Germany, who opposed it, to discuss what role the U.N. might play in postwar Iraq. The participants agreed on a statement calling for an “important” or “essential” role for the U.N. in rebuilding and for the EU’s help to stabilize Iraq.

While the council hammers out what that U.N. role might be, it could give control of Iraq’s oil revenue to a neutral party such as the World Bank or the secretary-general to administer, the way it temporarily transferred the Iraqi government’s role in the oil-for-food program to Annan.

There are several ways to keep the goods flowing, even though Iraq as a legal entity “is in limbo,” said Edward Luck, director of the Center on International Organization at Columbia University.

“At the moment, no one represents it ... and no one’s around to enforce sanctions either. Legally, one would want to tidy it up.”

Farley reported from the United Nations and Chen from St. Louis.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Sanctions against Iraq

The United Nations has passed several resolutions on Iraq since President Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990. Here are five of them.

Resolution 661

Aug. 6, 1990

Imposed trade sanctions on Iraq four days after it invaded Kuwait. The sanctions prevented any Iraqi exports of any product, including oil. It also imposed an arms embargo, barring the sale or supply of weapons to Iraq.

Resolution 687

April 3, 1991

Called for the destruction of Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and missiles with a range of more than 93 miles to deliver them. It set up a U.N. inspections commission to oversee the process and said sanctions could be lifted only after Baghdad proved to the United Nations it had dismantled its weapons of mass destruction.

Resolution 986

April 14, 1995

Created the “oil-for-food” program to help ordinary Iraqis cope with the sanctions. The program allowed Iraq to sell oil to buy food, medicine and other humanitarian goods; spare parts for its oil infrastructure; and to pay war reparations.

Resolution 1284

Dec. 17, 1999

Created a new inspections agency and said sanctions could be suspended for 120 days at a time if Iraq cooperated “in all respects” and made progress in fulfilling key remaining disarmament tasks. Iraq was never deemed to be fully cooperating, and the resolution was never invoked.

Resolution 1409

May 14, 2002

Revamped Iraqi trade sanctions, making it easier for Iraq to import civilian goods and continued the embargo on equipment with military uses.

Source: Associated Press