President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair were seemingly at odds with each other on Tuesday when the former said that the occupation forces would stay in Iraq for as long as "it was necessary" while the latter said that the new Iraqi government would have a veto power over the troops' stay in that country.
The statements have come after the US and UK moved a draft resolution in the Security Council seeking UN's approval for the occupation powers' action plan following the transfer of power to an interim Iraqi government on June 30.
The resolution calls on the UN envoy on Iraq, Lakhdar Brahimi, to identify individuals to be inducted in the interim government. The latter, it says, will organize a national conference to select a consultative council which would advise on holding elections no later than January 31, 2005, to a transitional assembly entrusted with the task of drafting Iraq's future constitution.
The plan also calls for setting up a US-led multinational force to keep the peace. The Iraqi government could review the multinational force's terms of engagement after one year but it would not be empowered to terminate these.
The draft resolution also provides for handing over Iraq's oil revenue fund to the interim government, with an international advisory board to monitor the management of the fund.
Because the resolution requires the UN's multinational force to be placed under American, and not UN, command, in all practical terms, this amounts to seeking international legitimacy for the US-UK occupation of Iraq.
Also, it is hard to see how elections could be held in a country that has been plunged into anarchy by the very same occupying powers. Iraq is in a state of full-blown insurgency, with the occupying forces' handpicked governing council operating under American tutelage and inspiring no confidence in the Iraqi people.
The perpetuation of a similar order beyond June 30, even if under a UN mandate, is likely to meet the same fate. Unless the resolution is modified to commit to the withdrawal of the occupation forces and to vest real powers in the UN itself, the world body should not endorse it. More so because the dispensation proposed under the resolution will not carry any credibility with the Iraqi people.
More water deaths
The death toll in the contaminated water crisis in Hyderabad has gone up to 10, and all that the Sindh government officials have done is to pass around the blame or to announce compensation for the lives lost.
Contaminated water from Manchhar Lake was released by the irrigation department into the Indus river as part of an annual procedure to increase the flow in the river during the summer.
That water it seems was badly contaminated, something that the authorities must have known in advance but decided to release it anyway. In any civilized country, the death of even a single person by drinking polluted water would be enough to make heads roll and for governments to order thorough inquiries.
In our case, unfortunately, ten dead and yet not a single official or government agency has been held accountable so far. All we see is officialdom making tall claims, hiding behind one excuse or another and passing the buck.
The other source of the contamination is said to be industrial effluent, released by factories situated close to the river. The Sindh Environmental Protection Agency has taken samples of the water.
But what good is that going to be now? It is not as if the EPA did not know that these factories were freely polluting the drinking water source. The government must act immediately and direct the irrigation department to stop releasing any more of the lake's water into the river.
Officials who authorized the release of the lake water in the first place, knowing that it was contaminated and could cause a public health catastrophe, must be held accountable. As for the toothless Sindh EPA, it should be given the authority to take legal action against the owners of the factories in question.