• Home
• Countries
• Iraq
• Reports
• Comparison of Drafts of Comprehensive Security Council Resolution on Iraq

Reports

Comparison of Drafts of Comprehensive Security Council Resolution on Iraq

by David Albright and Corey Hinderstein

December 14, 1999

The draft Security Council comprehensive resolution on Iraq has undergone many changes as Council members seek consensus. Negotiations during the last month have resulted in significant changes to the draft resolution, including:

The December 9 draft states that the UN Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) staff will be regarded as international civil servants and are therefore subject to Article 100 of the UN Charter. This article states that,

In the performance of their duties the Secretary-General and the staff shall not seek or receive instructions from any government or from any other authority external to the Organization. They shall refrain from any action which might reflect on their position as international officials responsible only to the Organization. Each Member of the United Nations undertakes to respect the exclusively international character of the responsibilities of the Secretary-General and the staff and not to seek to influence them in the discharge of their responsibilities.

The November 26 draft included this language in brackets, which is a common method used to reflect language that lacks agreement. The November 10 draft only recognized the need for adherence to article 100 of the UN charter. The December 9 draft included a requirement that the so-called “work program”, to be drawn up by UNMOVIC and the IAEA, must be approved by the Security Council. The November 26 draft included bracketed language, which said that the Council would review the work program. The November 10 draft did not mention the Council in reviewing or approving the formulation of the work program. The December 9 draft creates a role for the Security Council in consulting with the Secretary General on the membership of the College of Commissioners, which has to provide advice and guidance to UNMOVIC on significant policy decisions. The November 10 draft said only that the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC would consult with the Secretary General on this issue. The December 9 draft says that UNMOVIC can identify “as necessary” additional sites to be covered by the OMV system. This phrase in quotes did not exist in the November 10 draft. The December 9 draft does not include a phrase which was in the November 10 draft which stated that UNMOVIC shall take over “such staff as the Executive Chairman deems necessary” from UNSCOM. This language was also deleted in the November 26 draft. The November 26 and December 9 drafts state that UNMOVIC will assume UNSCOM’s role in agreements between the United Nations and Iraq. The November 10 draft did not stipulate this role. The December 9 draft directs UNMOVIC and the IAEA to draw upon the expertise of other international organizations in addressing the issue of the export/import mechanism. The November 26 draft also included this, but the November 10 draft did not. The December 9 draft and the November 26 draft give the period of suspension of sanctions as 120 days. The November 10 draft gives this period as 100 days. The December 9 draft has bracketed language on how long, after the Security Council receives reports from UNMOVIC and the IAEA that the reinforced OMV system is fully operational, until the suspension of import/export sanctions can occur. This period is identified with bracketed proposals of 60, 120, or 180 days. The November 26 draft has 120 days as the only option, also bracketed. The November 10 draft has the time of Iraqi cooperation as 180 days. This time refers specifically to the minimum amount of time Iraq must cooperate fully with UNMOVIC and the IAEA in fulfilling the work program specified in the resolution, including the key disarmament tasks and compliance with the reinforced OMV system.* The December 9 draft requests that the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC report to the Council through the Secretary General every three months pending the reports that Iraq has fulfilled its obligations under the work program. This draft also requests that the Executive Chairman report when the OMV system is fully operational. The November 26 draft has the same language. The November 10 draft requests that the Executive Chairman report directly to the Council, and do so every six months. The December 9 draft recognizes the need for an “effective, cooperative management structure” for UNMOVIC. This is different from the November 26 draft which called for an “effective Board of Management.” The November 10 draft was different still in calling for an “effective and collegial management” of UNMOVIC. The December 9 draft includes a mechanism for the Council to consider the suspension of sanctions 12 months from the date of adoption of the resolution, if Iraq has satisfied the conditions set out for it. This provision was not included in either the November 26 or the November 10 draft.

• Evelyn Leopold of Reuters reported on December 14, 1999 that this provision has been changed to state that Iraq must “cooperate in all respects” with UNMOVIC and the IAEA in fulfilling the work program.

A timeline of the requirements under the December 9 resolution before the import/export sanctions can be suspended.

A copy of the December 9, 1999 draft resolution can be found here.