The secretary-general of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, was to have discussions on Monday in the head office of the UN in New York with the American administrator in Iraq, Paul Bremer, and with the members of the Iraqi temporary government. This unprecedented dialogue comes following an attack in front of Paul Bremer's headquarters in Baghdad, in which no less than 25 died and a hundred were wounded, the great majority Iraqi. The UN expressed its "satisfaction" to be regarded as a recourse by the United States, but hesitated to involve itself — in particular in the electoral race of elimination envisaged by the Americans — before the transfer of sovereignty in Baghdad, planned for June. For their part, Paris and Berlin support a progressive return of the UN in Iraq.
This is not the first American return to the United Nations, but it is the most spectacular. Until now, it was a question for the Coalition of obtaining troops or money. It was addressed to the Security Council, which voted for a resolution after a few weeks of discussions.
This time, the Bush administration comes to the UN to ask for the direct intervention of Kofi Annan. "A search for a life buoy," writes the Washington Post.
Nine months after the fall of Baghdad, the American government faces a Gordian knot of problems: to whom to give power? By which process? Can one reject the claims of the Shiite majority which seeks elections without disqualifying the legitimacy of the next government? Can one cede power without provoking hostilities from the Kurds or the Sunnis? The problem must be solved before the summer, if possible, so that President Bush can make the state of progress in Iraq a part of his re-election campaign.
Twenty-four hours after the attack in which 25 died in front of his Baghdad palace, Paul Bremer, the American administrator, is at the UN on Mon., Jan. 19. According to the press, he intends to ask Kofi Annan to support his plan to give authority to the Iraqis on June 30. The project envisages a process of "caucuses" — primaries — and indirect suffrage rather than direct elections. It was unanimously adopted on Nov. 15 by the 25 members of the Iraqi Council, the authority chosen by the Coalition to form an embryo of local government, but it was strongly called into question on Jan. 10, when the religious chief of the majority-Shiite population, the Great Ayatollah Ali Al-Sistani, caused 20,000 of his partisans to descend into the streets of Basra.
The demonstration made some noise, but it marked several months in which Ali Al-Sistani had spoken the same message; his first fatwa dates from June. The Americans, up to now, had always proposed the plan's "flexibility," and minimized the divergences. Today, they wonder how much is rhetoric and if there is a space for compromise. "Sistani is doing, in a way, what his community expects of him. ... He defends it," explained Mary Jane Deeb, an Arab world specialist at the Library of Congress, to PBS on Friday.
"He seeks to show his power. Part of it is in bargaining," agrees a diplomat. "He tries to navigate Bremer as much as possible in his direction. The Kurds tried the same tactics."
Since a date has been fixed for the end of the occupation, Iraqi factions are positioning themselves for after the Coalition. The Kurds indicated that they would not support concessions made to the Shiites if they did not have their own constitutional guarantees to maintain their autonomy. The Sunnis are gathering within the "Council."
At the tripartite meeting on Monday, Kofi Annan had invited the Council, in the person of its current president, Adnane Pachachi. One after the other, a half-dozen of his colleagues were also announced.
For the Council, which includes 13 Shiites, the stake is enormous. If it is split between the Bremer plan and the Al-Sistani opposition, "it is likely to burst," comments one expert. Some of the Iraqis, such as Mr. Pachachi, want Kofi Annan to undertake a mediation between the Shiites and the Coalition, which is trying to convince Ali Al-Sistani that it will not injure his community as in 1920, but that it is impossible to hold elections in such a rapidly approaching time.
Until now, Kofi Annan has tried to avoid letting himself get involved in arbitrating the internal conflicts, hoping to spare the credibility and impartiality of the UN for the role the organization will have to play in Phase II, after the departure of Mr. Bremer. But on the question of the feasibility of the elections, he has been directly challenged by Ali Al-Sistani, who said on Dec. 12 that he was returning with the UN. On Dec. 16, "Mr. Annan limited his response, saying that the elections were technically difficult and politically undesirable in such an unstable country, the traditional perspective of the UN. The grand ayatollah was less asking than insisting on Dec. 30, when his representative to the Council, Mr. Al-Hakim, spoke of sending a mission to the UN to confirm this diagnosis on the spot. The idea of a political mission will be discussed during the Monday meeting.
The Americans — who dream of this — circulated the possibility of a mediation by Lakhdar Brahimi, who has just finished his mandate in Afghanistan, but that nothing had been confirmed with the UN on Sunday.
For Kofi Annan, the decision is difficult. He does not wish to show unwillingness, but supervising the "caucuses" and guaranteeing their regularity would be very theoretical, not least because it would require the UN to have its personnel all 18 provinces. To send in a mission would also seem to be a faulty idea, especially because, in contrast to Afghanistan, the UN does not have political experience in Iraq and knows little about the local persons in charge.
While Kofi Annan did not jump at the chance in December, as Shiites propose this solution again, there may now be a margin of compromise, the diplomats estimated. Mr. Annan does not want to involve the UN in a process in which it has decided nothing, however. But the UN may be tempted, as the attack of Sunday recalled that saftey remains a precondition and the priority for its organization.
Translated from the original by Ivan Boothe.
Translated from the original by Ivan Boothe.
www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,1-0@2-3220,36-349623,0.htmlE-mail this article