Too Little From Bush, Too Late

When U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan addressed heads of state from around the globe at the U.N. General Assembly’s annual summit last week, one prominent figure was not in attendance: the president of the United States. Bush arrived afterward and delivered an aloof and defensive speech in which he asked for the support of the U.N. in the rebuilding of Iraq. Playing hooky during the Secretary General’s speech was strikingly emblematic of Bush’s overall policy toward the U.N.: to show up late and half-heartedly.

That Bush went to the U.N. for support does show that he has recognized the failure of his go-it-alone approach to the operation in Iraq. But after ignoring the U.N. Security Council and weapons inspectors in deciding to go to war—and refusing for nearly five months after the invasion to consult with the General Assembly—Bush is sticking to his dismissive stance by opposing a meaningful role for the U.N. in the reconstruction of Iraq. The president asked the international community to “contribute greatly,” calling on the U.N. to “assist” the U.S. in drawing up an Iraqi constitution, training civil servants and overseeing elections. But he pointedly—and unwisely—refused to relinquish U.S. control of Iraq and make way for U.N. control of the reconstruction, stabilization and democratization of the country.

Former Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright noted in the latest issue of Foreign Policy magazine that “U.N. peacekeeping has maintained order in such diverse places as Namibia, El Salvador, Cambodia, eastern Slavonia, Mozambique, and Cyprus.” In contrast, the breakdown of security in Iraq and Afghanistan underscores the Bush administration’s inability to secure stability in post-conflict states and highlights the need for a change of course in Iraq.

The goal of a stable Iraqi democracy precludes a hasty withdrawal, but the prospect of a lengthy stay in Iraq is complicated by the risk that Americans will be viewed by Iraqis as occupiers, rather than as liberators. If this happens, U.S. dominion over Iraq threatens to become as much of a rallying point for militants and demagogues throughout the Arab world as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Although U.S. leaderhip and financial commitment would no doubt continue to be a significant component of the reconstruction effort, internationalizing control of Iraq through the U.N. would mitigate the appearance of hegemony and allow the world community sufficient time to lay a solid foundation for democracy before withdrawing from the region.

Bush’s hubristic disregard for the U.N. before, during and after the war has led to the current crisis the U.S. now faces in Iraq. Belatedly, the president has recognized the failure of his unilateral approach and acknowledged the need for assistance from an institution he had written off as “irrelevant.” Now it is time for Bush to abandon his stubborn insistence on calling the shots and do what is right for the Iraqi people and what is necessary for global security.