U.S.-Led Force OKd for Somalia : Relief: Security Council authorizes unprecedented operation to shunt warlords aside and get aid to starving millions. The U.N. will be a major expedition partner.

The U.N. Security Council voted unanimously Thursday to authorize an American-commanded force of mainly American troops to speed into the woeful nation of Somalia and brush aside the warlords and their young henchmen now preventing most food shipments from reaching the starving millions there.

But the council, trying to exert a control it lacked during the Persian Gulf War, included a series of provisions in its resolution that purported to make the United Nations a major partner in the military expedition.

Ambassadors took pains to describe the Somali operation as unprecedented, far different from the Korean and Gulf wars, when the United Nations authorized the United States to lead military coalitions against aggressors.

Asked to compare the Persian Gulf War and the Somali expedition, British Ambassador David Hannay told reporters, “That’s like comparing chalk and cheese, quite frankly.”

The Security Council resolution, passed by a vote of 15 to 0, insisted that the American commander consult with U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali about organizing the expedition. The resolution also set up a system of reporting that would allow the Security Council to monitor the work of the American-led force and make the final decision about ending the military operation.

It was not clear, however, whether the resolution actually limited the American command in a meaningful way or simply served as a salve to those governments irritated by the idea of an American-dominated force.

The provisions, however, were enough to satisfy Zimbabwe Ambassador Simbarashe Mumbengegwi, one of those most suspicious of American domination. This resolution, he said, “puts the United Nations at the center of such an operation.”

U.S. Ambassador Edward J. Perkins maintained that the Security Council had set a pattern for the future in a world of instability and ethnic tension.

“The post-Cold War world is likely to hold other Somalias in store for us,” he said. “The world will seek solutions that can be found only by nations banding together, led by the United Nations. In these endeavors, you will be able to count on the support of the United States.”

The vote was a rare show of unanimity from a group in which several members have been wary of even suggesting interference in the internal affairs of a member state. But even China, which usually abstains on such issues, voted in favor of the resolution.

Chinese Ambassador Li Daoyu explained that the Somali people’s “abyss of sufferings” demands “prompt, strong and exceptional measures.”

Both Ambassador Li and Belgian Ambassador Paul Noterdaeme said that they, like Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, would have preferred to deal with Somalia in another way--by augmenting the U.N. peacekeeping force there and keeping it under U.N. command.

But the U.S. government, which has promised to send at least 28,000 troops, would never commit so large a force to Somalia unless it was commanded by an American general. In fact, the Security Council meeting was delayed for an hour while Ambassador Perkins, evidently under instructions from Washington, succeeded in altering the wording of a paragraph to make it crystal-clear than an American would command the multinational operation. It will include troops from France, Italy and other nations.

The resolution was vague about what the present U.N. peacekeeping operation would do in Somalia while the U.S.-led troops pacified the warlords and their bands of young marauders. The United Nations has 500 Pakistani peacekeepers in Mogadishu, the capital; peacekeepers from other countries were supposed to swell this force to 3,500 during the next few weeks.

But Boutros-Ghali already has postponed the deployment of 750 Canadian peacekeepers. The resolution says that further deployment of the U.N. troops “should proceed at the discretion of the secretary general in the light of his assessment of conditions on the ground.”

The Security Council, however, made it clear that the peacekeepers would have a vital role in the reconstruction and rehabilitation of Somalia once the U.S.-led force had established a “secure environment” in the East African country.

Although there has been much talk of the United Nations establishing some kind of trusteeship over Somalia once the country is pacified, ambassadors insisted that this issue did not come up during discussions on the resolution authorizing the military force.

Using a familiar phrase from the resolutions authorizing the use of force in the Gulf War, the Security Council resolution authorized the secretary general and member states “to use all necessary means to establish as soon as possible a secure environment for humanitarian relief operations in Somalia.”

In U.N. parlance, that phrase “all necessary means” has become a euphemism for military force.

The phrase “secure environment” also seemed to take on a special connotation for the military operation. Asked if the military forces would disarm the warlords and their henchmen, French Ambassador Jean Bernard Merimee told reporters, “The environment can hardly be considered secure if everyone is running around with guns.”

But U.S. Ambassador Perkins told the Security Council, “One point should be clear: Our mission is essentially a peaceful one, and we will endorse the use of force only if and when we decide it is necessary to accomplish our objective.”

Although the White House has said that the American troops would leave Somalia before Inauguration Day, Jan. 20, the resolution sets no time limit on the military operation.

“Our military forces will remain in Somalia no longer than is necessary,” Perkins said. “We look forward to the early transition to an effective United Nations peacekeeping force. . . . Military intervention is no substitute for political reconciliation, and that task belongs firmly in the hands of Somalis.”

In Little Rock, Ark., President-elect Bill Clinton praised the U.N. action as a “historic and welcome step” and said that the United Nations had “provided new hope to millions of Somalis at risk of starvation.”

Clinton commended President Bush for “taking the lead” in the effort and said he appreciates Bush’s willingness to keep him informed as the Security Council resolution launches the United States into new military operations.

Times staff writer Douglas Jehl, in Little Rock, Ark., contributed to this report.