Yesterday's announcement of Iraq's new interim government, together with the dissolution of the Iraq Governing Council appointed by the US-led coalition occupying the country, opens the way for an intensive set of negotiations at the United Nations Security Council on a resolution to determine the new government's powers.
Despite well-founded suspicions that the US has dominated this process, it would be wrong to prejudge these negotiations. Sovereignty is to be formally transferred to the new administration on June 30th. Major military and political difficulties faced by the coalition may make it open to accept a resolution giving the interim government more independence than expected, ahead of elections planned for January next.
Bargaining between the chief US administrator in Iraq, Mr Paul Bremer, the UN representative Mr Lakhdar Brahimi and the outgoing governing council over recent days has had several surprising results. On Friday last it was announced that Mr Iyad Allawi is to become prime minister. A secular Shia, he is seen as an associate of the discredited Mr Ahmad Chalabi, the expatriot who gave unreliable intelligence to the US before and after the invasion of Iraq. Yesterday's announcement that the Sunni tribal leader and critic of US policy, Mr Ghazi al-Yawar, is to become interim president, and the decision of the outgoing council to stand down immediately in favour of a more balanced interim government endorsed by UN leaders and President Bush, set the scene for intense Security Council bargaining on the resolution tabled last week by the US and the UK.
The interim government contains considerable political and technocratic talent and seeks to represent Iraq's wide religious, regional and social diversities. Many of its members have only recently returned from exile and have shallow political roots in the country - an inevitable concomitant of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship. The crucial requirement now, if Iraq is genuinely to make a political transition based on elections in eight months time, is that the UN resolution should guarantee its independence. That comes straight up against the determination of the US to maintain direct control of military security and, through a huge presence continuing after June 30th, to have a determining influence on the interim administration's political and economic policies.
As President Bush has repeatedly acknowledged, military resistance to the occupation will continue and probably intensify during this transition. European states which have criticised US policy in Iraq do not want to see the country collapse into civil war should the coalition withdraw prematurely.
These contrasting interests and approaches could set the scene for a hard-nosed, yet constructive, attempt to ensure a successful transition. This objective is well worth the effort. The more clearly the interim government's independence is guaranteed the more likely it is to succeed.