現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争３６ > 881.html
★阿修羅♪
|
現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争３６ > 881.html
★阿修羅♪
|
|
アルジャジーラ経由ドイツ・フランス情報：イラクでのNATOの役割はアメリカに高くつく：国連平和維持軍にしなさい！
Opinion, July 2003, www.aljazeerah.info
US Faces High Price for NATO Role in Postwar Iraq
Thomas P. Spieker
Deutsche Presse-Agentur, 7/13/03
Arab News
BRUSSELS, 13 July 2003 ― Not even US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld seemed to know whether his government had actually asked NATO to send troops to help the beleaguered US-led occupation in Iraq. In the United States government's defense committee he passed the buck and simply said the state department was responsible for the matter.
The response of NATO diplomats at the alliance's headquarters in Brussels this week was more specific. Washington had not asked NATO to send peacekeeping troops to Iraq, they insisted.
And because the US government had not requested it, the 19 alliance members were not in a position to discuss it, the officials kept responding. Even though the US forces have the help of some NATO partners in Iraq, there is no involvement of the alliance as a whole in postwar Iraq.
An official involvement of NATO in postwar Iraq would actually be quite problematic, given the controversy before the war, observers say. NATO-members France and Germany have already taken a firm stance on the question. The US-led occupiers in Iraq first have to transfer the control of the country to the United Nations, they say.
"It would be a little inconsistent for France to be part of the coalition now, since we did not support the war," commented French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin.
As a result, an involvement would only be possible under the leadership of the United Nations, he added. Germany's government speaker Bela Anda took the same line in Berlin. To allow NATO to decide, the UN Security Council would therefore first have to pass another resolution which mandates the transition of power in Iraq to UN peacekeepers.
And there is even more at stake, observers say. It is unlikely that NATO would approve a mission unanimously, as stipulated by the alliance's constitution, if their peacekeepers were to be placed under US command, they say. Washington would also have to agree that NATO takes over the military command ― similarly to the NATO-led peacekeepers in the Balkans and those soon-to-be deployed in Afghanistan. "Washington knows the price they would have to pay," said a NATO official. But nobody in the alliance knows whether President Bush would be willing to pay that price, they add.
Meanwhile, Washington's allies are aware that pressure on the US government is mounting because of the on-going problems in postwar Iraq. “We were always aware that the war can be won by one country. We said it is more difficult to win the peace. We now see day by day, how difficult the situation is," said Villepin.
However, the NATO's anti-war members have not been gleeful in watching the US's struggle in postwar Iraq. Instead, they emphasize that the alliance has to do everything to avoid a repeat of the pre-war divisions among its members. And US Secretary of State Colin Powell has indicated that he wants to discuss a possible role for NATO in Iraq with Washington's allies.
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。