The US and Britain will face a major challenge to persuade the international community to send troops to Iraq unless they agree to share power, the UN Secretary General, Mr Kofi Annan, said yesterday.
He also indicated a way forward for the US and Britain might be a UN-mandated force in Iraq rather than one under US control, as is the case at present.
The assessment was delivered as the US and Britain renew their quest to get the international community to shoulder some of the burden in rebuilding Iraq.
Although the Security Council remains divided over America and Britain's decision to go to war on Iraq, the Bush administration appears to have calculated that such resentments would be swept aside by the outpouring of anger at this week's attack on the UN's headquarters in Baghdad.
However, Mr Annan made plain yesterday that, even after the attack on Baghdad, there was little appetite in the international community for sending troops to Iraq, especially under US command.
In his comments during a meeting with Mr Annan on Thursday, the US Secretary of State, Mr Colin Powell, gave no indication that the Pentagon would be willing to share authority.
The UN was not considering sending its own peacekeepers to Iraq, Mr Annan told a joint press conference with Britain's Foreign Secretary, Mr Jack Straw.
But "it is not excluded that the \ Council may decide to transform the operation into a UN-mandated, multinational force operating on the ground, with other governments coming in," Mr Annan said.
However, "it would imply not just burden-sharing but also sharing decisions and responsibility with the others. If that doesn't happen, I think it is going to be very difficult to get a second resolution that will satisfy everybody," he added.
Countries which opposed the war, such as France, Russia and Germany, appear as ill-disposed as ever to the US occupation of Iraq.
Washington's efforts to persuade countries such as India, Pakistan and Turkey to ease its military burden by sending soldiers has also foundered, with the potential contributors balking at the Pentagon's insistence at retaining command over operations.
France yesterday seemed to support Mr Annan's idea of a UN-mandated mission.
Foreign Minister Mr Dominique de Villepin urged the coalition powers to switch from "a logic of occupation to a logic of sovereignty" in Iraq.
"We can't make do with adjusting or enlarging the current plan," he told the daily Le Monde.
"The right thing would be to bring into play a true international force under the mandate of the United Nations. Sovereignty is a matter of urgency," Mr de Villepin added.
Turkey's Foreign Minister, Mr Abdullah Gul, made clear they would command their own sector of operations if they are deployed to bolster US forces in Iraq.
In an interview with the liberal daily Milliyet, Mr Gul said Ankara and Washington had agreed in preliminary talks that any Turkish troops would control their own separate region to the north or west of Baghdad. - (Guardian Service)
Mark Hennessy adds:
A decision about UN participation in a military force in Iraq is a matter for the Security Council, the Department of Foreign Affairs said last night.
Questioned about Mr Annan's comments, a spokesman said his remarks had been noted "very carefully".
"We have consistently argued that the UN should have a central role in both reconstruction and humanitarian work because the UN has unique experience and legitimacy," he said.
Irish troops cannot become part of a military force serving overseas unless there is first a UN mandate, followed by the approval of both the Government and the Oireachtas.