![]() |
|
April 08, 2003
Text of Bush/Blair Summit Statement
April 8, 2003 JOINT STATEMENT BY PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH The future of Iraq belongs to the Iraqi people. After years of dictatorship,
We are grateful to our men and women in uniform, as well as to the brave troops We also grieve for the loss of civilian life in Iraq. Coalition forces take We are taking every step possible to safeguard Muslim holy sites and other The Coalition is delivering food, medicine, and other humanitarian assistance to As we said at our March 16 meeting in the Azores, we will uphold our As the Coalition proceeds with the reconstruction of Iraq, it will work with its The day when Iraqis govern themselves must come quickly. As early as possible, Coalition forces will remain in Iraq as long as necessary to help the Iraqi Comments
Can't say much fairer than that. Posted by: DSmith at April 8, 2003 09:57 AMI'll wait for the actual results myself. Posted by: Gary Gunnels at April 8, 2003 10:01 AMNot sure if I understand this deference to the U.N. - the ineptness of that organisation is what brought us to this pass. Posted by: aelfheld at April 8, 2003 10:07 AMThe role available to the UN, basically humanitarian, will be defined and limited by the US. The only interesting part will be when we see which governments (of France, Germany, Russia, etc.) choose to obstruct the provision of UN aid on the basis that anything short of an Iraq run by the UN 'legitimises the invasion'. That is the moment which will define their relationship with the US for a long time to come. Posted by: NF at April 8, 2003 10:09 AMThis statement is very encouraging, it leaves open the possibility of repairing the rifts in international consensus and for a better future for all of us. The US has shown its determination to eradicate sources of economic and political instability by the use of military force. As the largest economic unit on the world stage this is probably inevitable. There is an undisputable place for a world forum for the advancement of and improvement of the lives of people in the rest of the world and that is the UN. It would be inappropriate for the US to sideline this institution for this role. I urge all of you who have doubts about the UN to consider who should be doing its job. I do not believe that the US would be interested in replacing this function of the UN. Posted by: jerry at April 8, 2003 10:47 AM
Highlighted phrases are important for they define the "vital" role the UN is going to play in post-war Iraq. The UN would be restricted to providing humanitarian assistance and an endorsement (not formation) of the post-war Iraq administration. Posted by: Martin Knight at April 8, 2003 11:47 AMThe US has shown its determination to eradicate sources of economic and political instability by the use of military force. As the largest economic unit on the world stage this is probably inevitable. If the US's only care were stability, it would not have undertaken action in Iraq. A stronger, more effective sanctions regime would have been a better choice if pure stability were the issue. I also tend to believe the US acts with the safety of its own people as the overriding concern, not stability. Again, Iraq is an example of that. There is an undisputable place for a world forum for the advancement of and improvement of the lives of people in the rest of the world and that is the UN. ... I do not believe that the US would be interested in replacing this function of the UN. I don't think the UN serves that function, frankly. What little good the UN does is largely the coordination of extant charity groups for hunger relief/health improvement. Those groups would act with or without the UN. Those UN organizations that deal with relief/health could be spun off. Posted by: Marm at April 8, 2003 05:48 PMThe UN is an organization which although flawed does provide a truly useful role in world affairs. An example of this is the World Health Organization 'WHO' - I doubt that the Chinese would be as ready to accept help over the current SARS disease outbreak from any other source. Like it or not, it does provide a truly global service that benefits us all. As an umbrella organization it is irreplaceable. The bulk of its activities are focused on relief/health and development as can be seen from a list of its departments The Security Council and the political debating floor of the UN are actually only a tiny part of the function of the UN. You could argue about spinning off the political function of the UN - How about crowning the President of the USA as King of Earth and setting up a court for representatives of the other nations on Earth to attend?. Perhaps the UN is an acceptable compromise. After all we take it for granted that democracy is built on argument and allows for dissent. Post a comment
|