AFTER THE WAR

 Editorial de  “The New York Times” del 8-4-03

Though the war in Iraq is not yet over, the transition from combat to governance has already begun. Winning the peace, and turning Iraq from tyranny to democracy, may be more difficult than waging the war. It is not a job Washington can do alone. As President Bush turns his attention to the future of Iraq, he would do well to heed the advice of Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain to bring the United Nations into play as quickly as possible. 

With American forces already making forays into downtown Baghdad, the war has progressed far faster than seemed possible just a few days ago. Though more fighting lies ahead before the government of Saddam Hussein is crushed, Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair wisely decided to get together yesterday in Northern Ireland to start making decisions about the future of Iraq. 

Washington might like to assign itself full responsibility for remaking Iraq, but the political and economic costs of doing so are sure to be severe. The quickest way to turn a military victory in Iraq into a political defeat in the Middle East is to install an American military viceroy in Baghdad, followed by a puppet Iraqi government. While Mr. Bush and his aides seem to understand that danger, it is not clear that they have settled on a viable plan to avoid it. 

Security in Iraq will have to remain in the hands of American and British forces for some time, but the legitimacy of the foreign presence will depend on how quickly the authority for governing the country can be transferred to an interim administration under U.N. sponsorship. Yes, that will require returning to the Security Council for a resolution, which is probably the last thing Mr. Bush wishes to do after the acrimonious collapse of diplomacy last month. But pique is not a good guide to making foreign policy.  

Nor is the answer to inflate the role of exiled leaders like Ahmad Chalabi, who has been airlifted into the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriya by American military forces. Mr. Chalabi may be well intentioned, but the man has not lived in his native country for 45 years. Anyone installed in power by Washington is certain to be seen throughout Iraq and the Arab world as an American puppet. The fact that Mr. Chalabi enjoys the support of the most hawkish elements of the Bush administration only makes him less credible in Iraq. 

Once security has been firmly re-established, the United Nations should assume the main responsibility for preparing and supervising democratic elections. That is the kind of role the U.N. is now performing in Afghanistan following America's military ouster of the Taliban. And by doing so it is helping to reinforce the legitimacy of Hamid Karzai's government. The U.N. is also by far the best choice to coordinate humanitarian relief and reconstruction aid in postwar Iraq. 

Secretary General Kofi Annan has already chosen the man he would like to represent the U.N. in Iraq, an experienced Pakistani diplomat named Rafeeuddin Ahmed. Mr. Ahmed will be able to operate effectively only if the Security Council manages to overcome its recent bitter divisions and authorizes his activities. 

Mr. Bush would also do well to draw a clear line between the responsibilities of the Pentagon and the State Department. The Defense Department has done a good job of fighting the war, and tens of thousands of American troops will be needed to maintain peace after the war ends. The State Department, however, should take the lead in helping Iraq create a new society and government.