Resolutions

France, Germany and Russia aren't happy with the latest US draft resolution on Iraq. It doesn't grant enough of a role to the UN, and sets out no timetable for a handover of power to an Iraqi government. At the same time, it calls on member states to contribute troops and money to the occupation government, where it will no doubt be spent enriching Bush cronies.

Now, noone is going to dig their heels in and veto this. We are not going to see the sort of mess in the security council we saw before the war. But there's also an increasing recognition that there is no quid pro quo with the Bush administration, either, so there's no incentive to vote for a disagreeable resolution. What's likely to happen is that the resolution will pass, but unless the US gives ground, there'll be more than a few abstentions... which is probably more of a slap in the face than outright opposition.

More importantly, UN resolution or not, I very much doubt anyone is going to seriously contribute to the occupation. Noone wants to send their troops to Iraq to die for Haliburton; noone wants to be cannon-fodder so the the US can bring its boys home. And noone wants to fund a giant corporate welfare scheme for US corporations.

So, Bush will get his resolution (albiet grudgingly), but I don't think he'll get the troops and money he wants. Having made this mess, he'll just have to clean it up himself.