UN's credibility at stake if U.S. goes it alone

Berni K. Moestafa, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

The United Nations stands to lose its credibility if Washington decides to scoff at international law and attacks Iraq without a mandate from the only multilateral body standing between world order and chaos, local analysts opined on Thursday.

But faced with this prospect, the UN Security Council could cave in to Washington's pressure and back the Iraq war with a resolution, they said.

"The UN is in a dilemma," said foreign political analyst Dewi Fortuna Anwar of the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI).

Meetings at the Security Council have begun since Monday to decide whether Iraq breached UN Resolution 1441 on ridding it of its weapons of mass destruction, and if so, whether that should warrant a war.

A three-month long inspection gave mixed results on the level of threat posed by Iraq. Doves at the council were hoping for more time to verify Iraq's absolute compliance to the resolution.

But as the debate is underway, Washington pushes for war, with or without a UN mandate.

"Attacking a country for reasons other than self defense is a clear violation to the international law, the UN principles," said Dewi.

She said a U.S. unilateral attack would set a bad precedent over the world. "This makes it look as if the international law applies only to small countries while big countries can do as they please."

And the world, she said, would heap the blame on the UN for failing to impose the international law without discrimination.

Indonesia must stay consistent and condemn the unilateral strike and risk straining ties with Washington, said LIPI foreign analyst Riza Sihbudi.

He suggested that Indonesia should bolster its leverage by protesting through international venues like the Non-Alignment Movement.

The seemingly imminent war on Iraq has sparked anti-war protests around the globe, including in Washington and other major U.S. cities.

But the U.S. has only provided a little evidence to buttress its allegation that Iraq owns chemical or nuclear weapons.

Analysts said U.S. President George W. Bush's State of the Union message, which was may have been used to prepare Americans for war, was unconvincing. "He was long on allegations but short on facts," said Dewi.

The U.S.'s most compelling case against Iraq is due to be presented before the security council on Feb. 5.

If that evidence is strong enough, analysts believe it might turn war skeptics like France and Germany to supporters.

But even if the UN were to give a mandate to the U.S. and its allies to forcefully disarm Iraq, the UN's credibility would still take a hit.

"A resolution would just give the impression of the council bowing to pressure from America," said Middle East observer Smith Alhadar.

Still Indonesia, as part of the international community, must accept the resolution and the subsequent war on Iraq, he said.

Foreign Minister Hassan Wirayuda in rejecting a unilateral strike against Iraq has said that any action should come under the UN framework.

Smith said the government must resist domestic pressure to act against the U.S. should the UN mandate military action.

"There will be pressure, not just from Islamic groups but also from nationalists, as this has become a matter of national pride," he said.