===================================================================== UN Warns of Civilian Crisis in Basra, Set to Vote on Post-War Iraq =====================================================================
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Monday called for "urgent measures" to restore electricity and water in the southern Iraqi city of Basra, which was under siege by US and British troops, amid fears its inhabitants "may be facing a humanitarian disaster," reports the Financial Times. On Monday, the International Committee of the Red Cross said the situation in Basra was tense and difficult, after water treatment facilities were shut off on Friday afternoon, because of a power failure.
On Saturday afternoon clean water supplies were restored to 40 percent of the city, but the "provisional water distribution networks only partially and temporarily cover the needs of 1.2 million residents." The ICRC said it had approached "all warring parties" to obtain access to the main water station in Wafaa Al-Qaid, north of the city.
"A city that size cannot afford to go without electricity or water for long; you can imagine what it does to sanitation," Annan said yesterday. Humanitarian organizations have warned that Iraq's largely urban population is particularly vulnerable to the impact of war, after years of conflict, economic mismanagement and sanctions.
The news comes as El Mundo (Spain) and LibÈration (France) report on aid agencies' preparations to deal with refugees in Iraq and Jordan.
Meanwhile, says the FT, discussions continued in New York on the revamp of Iraq's oil-for-food program, following proposals by Annan that the UN temporarily take control of its contracts, and introduce more flexibility, to deliver humanitarian goods. All countries agree that releasing supplies under the program could be essential, as evidence grows that the war could be longer and messier than Washington originally envisaged. About 60 percent of Iraqis are dependent on food handouts under the program. But many states are also concerned that UN involvement does not lighten the belligerents' responsibility for Iraqi welfare, as defined by the Geneva conventions, and not give de facto legitimacy to their action.
The Daily Telegraph (UK) notes that the UN Security Council could vote as early as tomorrow on a new resolution paving the way for the post-Saddam Hussein era, according to diplomats. Annan is expected to be given powers to take over the role of the Iraqi government in ordering and distributing billions of pounds worth of civilian supplies.
The move is ostensibly a temporary "technical adjustment" to the oil-for-food program, the story notes. Although diplomats say it is not a retrospective authorization for war, it amounts to acceptance that Saddam's regime is no longer functioning, and that it may soon cease to exist entirely.
Iraq has furiously accused Annan of acting as a lackey of the Americans in "implementing the colonial illusion of the removal of the state of Iraq." But despite the bitterness over the failed attempt to secure a second UN resolution authorizing war, France and Russia seem ready to cooperate on what British diplomats now call a "third" resolution to revive humanitarian aid.
"There is no reason for the humanitarian issue to be held hostage," said one French source. "Our policy is to support the secretary-general. We should avoid politicizing the exercise."
America is expected to support the new resolution, though "not at any price," diplomats said-meaning there would be no repetition of the past weeks of chequebook diplomacy and vote-seeking at the Security Council. For all its skepticism towards the UN, and its weariness at UN horse-trading, the US administration sees practical advantages in placing some bureaucratic powers in Annan's hands, the story says. Its reasons include bowing to British pleas to make the post-war administration appear somewhat international. They also include a desire to "streamline" the old oil-for-food program-diplomatic code for excluding French and Russian companies.
French President Jacques Chirac has meanwhile drawn up the next battle-lines with America: a possible "fourth" resolution to approve a post-Saddam government. He said France would not allow the UN to "legitimize" the invasion.
The news comes as German Minister for Development Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul says in an interview with Die Welt (Germany) that she will not support plans for a US protectorate in Iraq and the establishment of the US dollar as the official currency. The US should carry the main responsibility for reconstruction in the country after the war, she says, adding that Germany will contribute to aid payments and projects according to the will of the UN. In terms of immediate aid, Wieczorek-Zeul pointed out that Germany has already made Ä50 million available out of the current 2003 budget.
British diplomats see the modification of the oil-for-food program as an important step in healing the wounds of the UN, but they admit there are differences with America over the role the UN would play, adds the FT.
In a separate report, the FT notes that British International Development Secretary Clare Short said yesterday after a visit to New York that she was "hopeful" of progress in talks on the reconstruction of Iraq after Saddam Hussein's downfall, "in line with the agreement" reached between Britain and the US in the Azores. The UN's authorization was a pre-condition for World Bank, IMF and many countries' engagement, she said, adding: "It is clear we can only rise to this challenge if we heal the rifts in the international community and engage all the major players in supporting the people of Iraq in rebuilding their country."
The Daily Telegraph, the Guardian (UK), the Independent (UK) and Agence France-Presse also quote her as saying: "There is a sense of regret and dismay at the UN and in the IMF and the World Bank about the divisions that were allowed to arise in the international community's handling of the Iraq crisis. There is agreement that our duty now is to minimize the suffering of the people of Iraq during the conflict and to ensure that humanitarian relief and support for reconstruction is in place. This requires a healing of international divisions."
===================================================================== Bush Seeks $75 Billion to Cover Costs of Conflict, Reconstruction, Aid to Anti-Terrorist Allies =====================================================================
US President George W. Bush will on Tuesday ask Congress to provide about $74.7 billion to fund the war in Iraq, finance the help provided by regional allies and cover the costs of heightened US homeland security, reports the Financial Times. The bulk of the additional spending requested will go to the prosecution of the war-$63 billion in total which includes $5 billion for the replenishment of munitions as well as other associated costs.
A senior administration official said on Monday the White House's calculation was based on the assumption that the US would start bringing troops home within six months. The specific spending allocation for the deployment, engagement and return of the US armed forces is $53 billion.
US officials emphasized that the cost of sending the US military to the Gulf even before the first missiles were fired was roughly $30 billion. The point they made was that fighting a war was only marginally more expensive-an estimated $2 billion a month more-than the roughly $5 billion a month it was costing to keep US military on the ground in the Gulf intimidating the Iraqi regime.
The Bush administration will also ask for $4 billion for homeland security, and $8 billion for financial assistance to allies in the region and fellow nations fighting the war on terror as well as to pay for the costs of relief and reconstruction in postwar Iraq.
A senior administration official said on Monday that the US was expecting substantial international contributions to the post-war reconstruction effort. The countries set to benefit from the financial assistance include Turkey, Jordan, Israel, Egypt, the Philippines and Colombia, where US officials say the war on terror is intersecting with the fight against the drug industry.