I suppose the situation makes sense, in a primitive sort of way: nations with international reputations based on decades of experience will be allowed to play a role in Iraq /If and Only If/ they kiss American ass; I think we all have some experience with that attitude. No?
Three War Critics Want U.N. Effort to Rebuild [nytimes.com] - " ... At an hourlong news conference notably short on specifics, Mr. Putin said Mr. Chirac had suggested that the rebuilding effort in Iraq should be modeled after the one in Afghanistan last year. In that instance, the United Nations held an international conference to line up postwar aid for Afghanistan, then helped assemble a temporary government to serve as a bridge to free elections.
Only the United Nations has the stamp of legitimacy and impartiality essential to creating a broadly backed government, Mr. Putin said, adding that "the fate of the country should be given to the hands of the Iraqi people, the Iraqis themselves." "But first of all," he said, "the occupying forces should resolve the most urgent humanitarian issues."
Groups Say U.S. Lags on Restoring Order [washingtonpost.com] - "... In Geneva, the International Committee of the Red Cross said in a statement that it is "profoundly alarmed by the chaos currently prevailing in Baghdad and other parts of Iraq." It said the medical system in Baghdad "has virtually collapsed," with hospitals closed due to combat damage, looting and fear of looting.
The ICRC urged the United States and Britain to fulfill their obligations under international humanitarian law as "occupying powers" to stop violence against civilians. Amnesty International made a similar demand, calling on the allies to deploy "adequate numbers of troops with the appropriate training to maintain law and order."
U.S. Diplomats Are Leaving Overseas Posts [nytimes.com] - " ... In recent months, the State Department has evacuated about 1,400 diplomats and their dependents from 17 countries, the officials said.