by Josh Drobnyk
U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter met with the U.N. secretary general this week and suggested sending a peacekeeping force to Iraq to attract a broader international presence to the country.
The 30-minute meeting at U.N. headquarters in New York on Monday was Specter's first with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon since he took office at the start of the year.
''If you had a U.N. umbrella, I think that other nations would be a lot more likely to support the effort than under the American banner,'' Specter, R-Pa., said in an interview Tuesday. ''So many nations around the world don't like what we've done, but they also do not want to see Iraq disintegrate.''
Specter's meeting comes just days before Ki-moon meets with dozens of foreign ministers to discuss the situation in Iraq. And it comes a week after the top American commander in Iraq laid out a plan to begin drawing down the troop level this year but keep at least 130,000 troops in the country through mid-2008.
Specter, who had declined to give his opinion of that plan before Tuesday, called it ''a good sign,'' but stopped short of endorsing the proposal.
Photo by Haraz N. Ghanbari/Associated Press
''I think the proposal to draw down a sizable number before Christmas is a step in the right direction,'' he said. ''The thing that is hard to calculate is when, if ever, we are going to see some progress on the political side. The surge was designed to give time to the Iraqis to come to terms on the political stuff, and instead of that, the signs are that it is becoming worse.''
In the coming days, the Senate is expected to take up a variety of measures on the Iraq war. Specter said he is still undecided on an amendment by Sen. Jim Webb, a Virginia Democrat, that would effectively force a drawdown of troops by requiring they spend an equal amount of time at home as abroad. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he would recommend a veto of that measure.
Another, cosponsored by Specter, would encourage the U.S. military to transition away from combat and toward counterterrorism and training Iraqi forces. ''There are a lot of moving parts now,'' Specter said.
Asked whether he would support a measure with a definite timetable for withdrawal, similar to ones that he voted against earlier this year, Specter said: ''I think [Democrats] pretty much abandoned that. Nobody has asked me to support that plan in a long time.''
Regarding his proposal to send a U.N. peacekeeping force to Iraq, Specter said he was simply broaching the subject and did not suggest a specific number of troops. He said Ki-moon's response was ''non-committal.''
With 70,000 peacekeeping forces around the world -- in such places as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and Lebanon -- and the international community appearing less willing to lend a hand in Iraq, at least militarily, the prospect of a U.N. military presence in Iraq in the short term appears slim.
The U.N. pulled out most of its staff in 2003 after a bomb attack in Baghdad killed the top U.N. envoy to the country. It has about 55 administrative staffers in Iraq now. U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said Ki-moon was not prepared to endorse a plan to send U.N. troops to Iraq. ''Ultimately, at this stage we are not there yet,'' he said.
White House spokesman Alex Conant, meanwhile, said in an e-mail that the administration welcomes ''greater involvement of the U.N. and the international community, but a U.N. peacekeeping force is not likely in the near term.''
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Reality:
1) The U.N won't send a significant force into Iraq.
2) Even if they did, experience from Lebanon and other places proves that the U.N. force would do nothing, and/or run away at the first sign of trouble. Sadly, the only thing UN "peacekeeping" forces accomplish is to sexually assault the locals.
3) The do-nothing U.N. is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Posted by: Bruce | September 19, 2007 2:30 PM
RNCBruce,
Wasn't it Cut and Run Ronny Reagan who first fled from Lebanon with the first sign of trouble? Go back to Faux Noise please!
Posted by: Neal | September 19, 2007 2:43 PM
Specter is slow to the punch but we do need to start changing strategy in Iraq, we could start by drawing back our forces to local bases in Iraq. It won't matter if we stay in Iraq for a 1000 years there is still going to be some sort of a civil war that's going to happen, we can only hope to tamp it down a little and then deal with the "winner".
These people (Sunni, Shiites) have been fighting eack other for over 1500 years about who succeeded Mohammad, they don't forget nor do they believe in changing their ways.
It would have been nice if our idiot President would have done some homework on Iraq and the middle-east in general BEFORE he trumped up his civil war in Iraq.
Posted by: John E | September 19, 2007 2:52 PM
Who is this Spector Defeatocrat?
Posted by: Ronnie Rey Starling, Jr | September 19, 2007 3:02 PM
"DIPLOYMACY COUNTS, DIPLOMACY COUNTS" YEA, YEA, YEA, YEA, finally someone is talking DIPLOMACY.
Of course this White House is balking because thats not in the 93 billion more dollars needed to break the Treasury of the United States.
White House method is send money to Wanna BE Sheiks. The give Al queda a new identity. Shia, Sunni, Kurdish but no uniform. I mean we are war with a enemy with no uniform and the State Department is not using Diplomacy, they are SUPPLYING ALL SIDES TO JUSTIFY GEORGE BUSH'S AND DICK CHENEYS ULTIMATE MISSION 'FAILED POLICIES' A broke america, a broke army and all the money in the world then move to DUBAI!
ARLEN SPECTOR is showing how his GOP is just so stuck up Culture of Corruption butt of this White House and its staff.
46 Fillibusters later and we having nothing a stalled congress with a majority.
Stalled Congress equals failed policies and an unsafe america.
HEY ITS NOT LIKE WE ARE LISTENING TO THE GENERALS ON THE GROUND.
peackeeping, peace, WHAT IS THAT?
BUSH NEEDS TIME TO PUSH HIS GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD THAT SHOULD BE FILLIBUSTERED BY THE DEMOCRATS. LET THEM SWEAT UNTIL WE CONFIRM AN ATTORNEY THAT WILL UPHOLD THE LAW THAT WAS "broken"
Posted by: Roger Morris | September 19, 2007 3:24 PM
Arlen Specter is plain wrong. In a word he's a jerk and a RINO that is co-sponsoring legislation with Dickie Durbin to fund Congressional Campaigns with a TV ad tax.
Tv stations would have to operate in third world countries or offshore locales to avoid this mother of all taxes from incumbent egomaniacs in Congress. Specter doesn't know what to do in Itaq--he spends too much time kissing Leaky Leahy's posterior and now he's fogged up. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | September 19, 2007 4:02 PM
Unlike some posters here, I think Arlen Specter's approach is fundamentally sound. It is in accordance with the recommendations of the ISG - to the extent that it would involve peace-keeping forces from other countries in the region.
Most of Iraq's regional neighbors clearly have a vested interest in seeing Iraq succeed. They are the countries who now harbor most of Iraq's war refugees. If Iraq doesn't succeed at stabilizing, the refugees won't return, and Iraq's neighbors will also have suffered a grievous loss.
The instability of Iraq has already threatened to overflow its borders. Turkey, for instance, has already massed troops on its borders to counter Kurdish threats. No one in the area would be secure if that situation went unchecked. So, yes, I think he has a great idea if peace-keeping forces for his "umbrella" come from places like Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Turkey, and yes, even Syria.
The alternative is to allow Iran occupy Iraq under the pretext of restoring order. That would pose an unacceptable threat to the region. A number of smaller Arabic countries have already expressed a desire to arm themselves with nuclear weapons, ostensibly for the purpose of fending off any threats from Iran. Nuclear proliferation in that region is unthinkable.
Furthermore, there would be a significant benefit to having more Arabs involved in peace-keeping. Most important, is the fact that terrorists would no longer be able to claim that "infidels" (us) control or occupy Muslim lands (which is a no-no in the Koran). They have been using that argument for a long time to boost recruitment. The lack of an East-West clash of cultures would be a big plus.
Besides, we need someone to step on the same land mine we did, so we can slide our foot off before it blows us up.
Posted by: John W. | September 19, 2007 5:53 PM
Man I am NEVER going to visit Springpatch again. Look at how all the poisonous gas coming from the Capital destroys the minds and the thinking of the people that live there. I think I'll move to Anniston, AL. There, they are only incinerating huge old stores of Army nerve gas from WWII. It must be better than the BS coming from Springpatch.
Posted by: snitramc | September 19, 2007 5:54 PM
mullah cimoc say each ameriki having two gonad so jealous of mujahid fighters in Irak.
usa army say of them mujahid: a 'hardline group of fighters who have no intention of leaving.'
These hardline man all having the two gonad.
Ameriki having the two gonad him understand. But so many ameriki now the feminzied like woman not having even one gonad.
USA media make all ameriki man accepting the woman to rule over him. The war reportr him the woman. the power person in tv show him the woman. this to make ameriki man the obedient.
Now ameirki society becoming so the sick. Is the punish for cruel and torture in
iraq?
Google: mighty wurlitzer +cia learn how ameriki media so control now. all for serve masters in tel aviv.
also: ameriki woman now so slut with LBT (low back tattoo) and the so skinny and cannot having the child, just loving dog and cat.
Posted by: mullah cimoc | September 19, 2007 9:28 PM
Yeah, those 130,000 troops in Iraq were there BEFORE the "surge"! When do THEY get to come home?
I fear that no matter how reasonable Specter's concept may sound, our fearless leader thumbed his nose at the rest of the world, and the UN, when he invaded Iraq. I have trouble understanding why they should bail him out now.
Posted by: athena | September 19, 2007 9:47 PM
Reality - more Americans die if the UN doesn't go in, fewer if it does. Or is that not important to certain "people" in this country. Talk about supporting the troops. Sheesh.
Posted by: snitramc | September 19, 2007 10:55 PM
RNC Bruce,
The U.N. only has the authority and power that its member states provide it.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 20, 2007 7:06 AM