Politics and diplomacy took over from war this week as the dust settled on the US-led Coalition's military victory over Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq.
The key emerging questions in this post-war period concern who is to determine Iraq's future political and economic development and how this is to be legitimised legally and internationally. President Bush's demand that the United Nations should lift its economic sanctions against Iraq raised them sharply, since that cannot legally be done, and oil cannot flow, until the UN is satisfied Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have been dealt with. This sets the scene for another political confrontation at the Security Council, echoing its divisions before the war.
At the European Union's summit in Athens President Chirac of France said in response to Mr Bush's demand that "now it is up to the United Nations to define the modalities of the lifting of sanctions". He is now more confident of EU support since the summit agreed the UN should have a central role in Iraq's post-war reconstruction. While this is a minimal and as yet abstract statement of policy intended to repair the EU's deep divisions, its political logic goes in the right direction. It has the support of existing and prospective member-states which supported the invasion, despite its lack of an explicit Security Council mandate. They now want to see the UN's central role reaffirmed.
The temptations on the United States as a war victor to determine Iraq's future unilaterally are amply illustrated by the weapons of mass destruction issue. That they exist and must be disarmed was the main justification for the US-British decision to go to war. Now that it is over the US is sending its own team to Iraq to track them down and does not want the UN's arms inspection operation to be re-established. But Iraq's oil cannot flow again unless the UN resolves the weapons issue. That gives France, Russia and China, which have major interests in the existing oil-for-food policy, key leverage.
Both for Iraq's future and the well-being of international politics it is essential that these decisions are taken multilaterally through the UN and not dominated by the United States. Only in this way can international law and legitimacy be attached to the restoration of Iraq's political sovereignty and its territorial integrity maintained. Iraq's disarmament, oil resources and self-rule depend on such international acceptability.
It will take a determined effort to convince the US this is the best way to proceed. This week's EU summit helped to prepare the ground for exerting such pressure. There is growing support for the EU to agree new mechanisms which would give it a more coherent and united foreign policy profile. At the Convention on the Future of Europe and the subsequent treaty negotiations these issues will be argued out in coming months. The Government will have an important role to play ahead of and during its EU Presidency in the first half of next year. The Iraq crisis will ensure these issues are debated and decided in full awareness of their potential impact on world affairs.