U.S. won't turn to U.N. for help in Iraq

[Barrett808]

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has abandoned the idea of giving the United Nations more of a role in the occupation of Iraq as sought by France, India and other countries as a condition for their participation in peacekeeping there, administration officials said on Wednesday.

Instead, the officials said, the United States would widen its effort to enlist other countries to assist the occupation forces in Iraq, which are dominated by the 139,000 U.S. troops there.

In addition to American forces in Iraq, there are 21,000 troops representing 18 countries. At present, 11,000 of that number are from Britain. The United States plans to seek larger numbers to help, especially with relief supplies that are coming from another dozen countries.

Administration officials said that in spite of the difficult security situation in Iraq, there was a consensus in the administration that it would be better to work with these countries than to involve the United Nations or countries that opposed the war and are now eager to exercise influence in a postwar Iraq.

"The administration is not willing to confront going to the Security Council and saying, 'We really need to make Iraq an international operation,' " said an administration official. "You can make a case that it would be better to do that, but, right now, the situation in Iraq is not that dire."

(more)

http://www.starbanner.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030814/NEWS/208140327/1004/NEWS02

[arcane1]

1. how dire must it get?

I take that back, I'm not sure I want to know...

[mjb4]

2. but UN ENDORSED the new gov't

in Iraq...wouldn't endorsement include HELP! lying dogs in bushco