UN Security Council Resolution Acknowledges American Occupation of Iraq

The military operation in Iraq was legal after all
Having approved a resolution to lift economic sanctions against Iraq, the UN Security Council has virtually put an end to the longstanding conflict between some of the world's leading countries. A new world order is about to be formed - like it or not. However, the countries that previously protested the war in Iraq (especially Russia, France and Germany) are very actively participating in forming this new world order, having simplified the USA's efforts.

In fact, no one had any doubts that the USA would manage to have the resolution approved by the UN Security Council. However, Russian officials had stated before that it was too early to pass a new resolution on Iraq, establishing a legitimate government was the first priority. However, it seems that Russia decided not to look for trouble after France supported the resolution to lift economic sanctions. This is an easy thing to understand, for Moscow does not want to be criticized by Washington. The Russian government tried to minimize the harm, so to speak. Moscow made Washington acknowledge Iraq’s debts; then, Russia stopped putting obstacles in the way of the new resolution, taking into consideration the fact that other members of the UN Security Council supported it as well. It seems that the Russian government thought that it would not be nice to stand out against such a background.

The creation of the resolution's text became a formal issue. Washington pretended that it respected the opinion of other members of the Security Council. The latter pretended that passing such an important resolution was just what the doctor ordered. It has now been passed. The Syrian delegation did not show up for the voting, but Syrian officials soon announced that they were ready to sign the document.

It looks like the resolution to lift economic sanctions against Iraq made only one person indignant - pro-American Iraqi politician Ahmed Chalabi. The politician lambasted the resolution, which had virtually legalized the American occupation of Iraq. Chalabi stated that the document contradicted all the agreements that the Iraqi opposition had with the US-led administration.

However, the Iraqi politician is absolutely right. The new resolution implies that the military operation in Iraq has been acknowledged as legal. In other words, it was legal to invade a sovereign state, to kill civilians with "smart bombs," and to loot Iraqi museums after the war. Everything was absolutely legal; Washington's actions were totally lawful. However, why did the adversaries of the war make such a fuss before, considering this development? It would have been easier to let Americans start the war at once. At least, there would have been less discussion about the reduction of the UN's role in international politics.