Troop Withdrawal, U.N. Peacekeeping Options At Forefront In Iraq

Just a day after Paul Bremer, the supreme administrator of the U.S. military government in Iraq, and Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State, set forth their intention of pulling out U.S. armed forces from Iraq with some reservation, U.S. President George W. Bush has disclosed the true meaning of the statement more clearly. He stated that though sovereignty would be handed over to Iraq on June 30, the stationing of U.S. forces there would continue.

The background and inner thoughts of these statements, which roughly conflict with each other, have attracted people’s attention. Is the U.S. considering a troop pullout or is it aiming at a different target by making the excuse of a troop evacuation?

--Soothing Iraqi public opinion?

According to a recent survey carried out by the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), approximately 80 percent of the Iraqi people distrust the CPA, and 82 percent of people are opposed to the stationing of coalition forces in Iraq.

Anti-U.S. sentiments have reached their highest level since the occurrence of maltreatment of war prisoners in Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq. Because of this case, some experts have assessed that the statements setting forth a troop evacuation are intentional countermeasures for soothing anti-U.S. public opinion in Iraq, which is continuously growing.

As most of the members of the provisional authority of Iraq have failed to appear at a meeting presided over by Bremer last October due to their opposition against U.S. military rule in Iraq, Bush has coaxed the executive ranks of Iraqi administrators, remarking that “I will give more responsibilities and authority to the provisional authorities of Iraq from now on.”

The coalition forces, surprisingly, freed 315 Iraqis locked up in Abu Ghraib on May 14, backing these assessments. It has passed on that the release was implemented under orders from Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. Secretary of Defense.

--Pressures on Iraq and the U.N.

As to whether or not U.S. forces will continue to be stationed in Iraq, the provisional Iraqi government, which will be organized after the sovereignty takeover, and the “State of Forces Agreement” regarding U.S. forces in Iraq will decide the matter.

Though expressing the possibility of troop evacuation, Powell asserted that “further stationing is needed to protect and support the Iraqi people and the provisional government of Iraq.” He added that “In order to station troops in Iraq after June 30, the Iraqi administration should confer the authority necessary for further stationing of coalition forces.”

Regarding the existing statements, Powell seemed to center on the troop stationing rather than the evacuation. He noted that “we will pull out if we are not welcome, but the capability to secure public peace should be guaranteed in advance.” It is strongly doubtful that the independent authority the newly organized provisional government will have will be enough to contradict the thoughts of the U.S. on this matter.

On May 15, President Bush expressed his skepticism of the ability of the provisional government in Iraq, stating “We will stay and help the Iraqi people until they can depend on themselves by their own hands.”

--Inducing the U.N. into Iraq?

The statement of Powell that asserted the necessity of a brand-new U.N. resolution for maintaining the continuous stationing of coalition forces in Iraq seems to imply that he will allow the issues of intervention of the U.N. and whether or not U.S. troops will be continuously stationed in Iraq to engage each other.

White House security aide, Dr. Condoleezza Rice, visited Russia from May 14 to 16, met with the Russian President Vladimir Putin and delivered a letter from Bush to him. The U.S., which is driving forward a new U.N. resolution at the Security Council of U.N., needs the consent of Russia.

Promising cooperation on the Iraqi crisis with France last week, Russia has disclosed that “we will only support a resolution that gathers unanimous agreement from the members of the Security Council.”

It has been passed on that the U.S. has asked the Russia about their standpoint in terms of the dispatch of U.N. peacekeeping forces to Iraq. Russia has disclosed that “if the newly organized Iraqi provisional government is confirmed only to govern the country until the general election, and the schedule of the peacekeeping force dispatch is determined, we will not be opposed to the dispatch itself.”

Sung-Won Joo swon@donga.com