The Government's decision not to send our troops to Iraq is the right one which reflects the sentiments of people of our country. Russia and Germany also decided not to send their troops. With the world countries not rallying around US and Britain efforts to consolidate their post-war position in Iraq, the United Nations' President Kofi Annan has requested the nations to support the cause of bringing back peace in Iraq. First of all, United States and Britain should apologize for their folly (of creating a mess in Iraq without valid evidences of Iraq having mass destruction weapons) and then plead for the help to restore peace in Iraq. It should be told once that its high handed approach of discarding United Nations before an event and expecting the other countries to support it to rectify its mistake is not on. Their high handed approach is becoming evident amid revelations that both the Bush administration and the Blair Government doctored intelligence reports to suit their war project. Internally, it is the victory of democratic national opinion. This is not only a right decision but also a decision made keeping in mind the long term interests of our nation and its sovereignty, mood of people in Iraq, our relations with West Asia and in particular with Gulf countries, and above all the dignity and interests of our armed forces. There is a definite strategic disadvantages of adverse reaction from Iran and Turkey to the presence of Indian troops if we had agreed to send our troops. Why should we have to expend our resources, both human and financial, for the sake of United States which is struggling to consolidate an illegitimate war against a sovereign country? United States would not be pleased with the rejection of its request, however our national interest is paramount for us. There is a stiff public opposition and revolt against the American-sponsored Iraq Administrative Council installed by the US-UK joint operation. In such a situation our troops would have to face heavy human loss if we decided to send our troops. It is heartening to note that all exigencies and short-term attractions (permanent membership in UN Security Council, lucrative contracts, help in dealing with Pakistan etc) were set aside.

Even if United Nations mandate is there (which is likely to be issued shortly) , we should ask for explanations as to the role of our troops in Iraq. We should not feel pressurized under any moral obligation to respond to a likely UN mandate even if one such mandate is issued. It should be sent only to help the  people of Iraq and not for any other reasons. Our troops should be sent only for relief measures and to set up infrastructure, health and education facilities. In other words, our troops should be a mixed one in terms of professionals and personnel from our defense forces (not to read as "armed forces"). As a concrete gesture of our support to the Iraqi people, we must speed up the joint project with Jordan and construct a hospital in Najaf in Iraq. India should put pressure on USA and UK to disengage from Iraq much before the contemplated 18-30 months of their stay in Iraq soil. This would help in bringing peace to Iraq. Only then UN troops can do any meaningful assistance to the affected Iraqi people. In fact, if any UN mandate comes up, India should mobilize support with the like minded countries and pose a pre-condition to UN that USA and UK forces should leave Iraq before any relief measures (rehabilitation/reconstruction /peace-keeping activities) begin. If they have to be there for any judicious reason, they should be asked to submit a clear road map for Iraq. Although as envisaged by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483, the Administrative Council is set-up, this "governing council" should not only have advisory functions, but also must be given the executive authority as well.