The war in Iraq and the role of the UN came under the spotlight during debate by Foreign Affairs Minister Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma on her budget vote in the National Assembly in the coastal city of Cape Town.

The minister said: "We have to re-establish the unity of the international community and the centrality of the UN in dealing with the aftermath of the war (in Iraq)."

"Some would want us to choose a path where the world is premised on the law of survival of the fittest, which departs from the very essence and founding principles of the United Nations," she noted.

Dlamini-Zuma was quoted by the South African Press Association as saying: "Those who want us to depart from the principles of the charter want us to believe that the powerful, the rich and the technologically advanced should rule the world using their economic and military might."

"They want us to build a world where the rich and powerful can impose their will on the poor and weak. They want us to build a world where the powerful and the rich can change regimes at will."

"A world where the lives of the innocent and weak are not protected. A world of the survival of the fittest. This will lead to a new world order outside the framework of the UN," Dlamini-Zuma said.

She stressed that the multilateral system of global governance should remain the only response to all challenges facing humanity today.

"We must have common rules, shared and applied equally by all, without fear or favor." she said.

Deputy Foreign Affairs Minister Aziz Pahad said the coalition's decision to use force outside the framework of the Security Council "is a classic failure of negotiations and diplomacy, and the world remains sharply divided on this issue".

War was not a solution to world problems, and the vast majority of countries and billions of people throughout the world supported this position, including all the major religious leaders.

Anti-war was not anti-Americanism, as millions of Americans were also opposed to the war. "The war must not set a precedent which further undermines multilaterism, and especially the authority of the UN and the Security Council," Pahad said.

The Democratic Alliance's Colin Eglin said the UN Security Council had failed to deal effectively with the issue of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

This, combined with the decision of the United States and the United Kingdom to make war on Iraq without the approval of the UN, had dealt a blow both to the UN's role, and to multilateralism as a mechanism for regulating international relationships.

"Today as a consequence -- unless the nations of the world are simply going to accept that international relationships will be dominated by a single superpower, whose government will decide unilaterally if and when war is an appropriate instrument to use --they will have to unite to rebuild the UN as a multilateral body that is capable of playing an effective part in regulating international order," Eglin said.

Koos van der Merwe of the Inkatha Freedom Party said the war had "unbelievable" implications for the international political order, as well as for future relations between states.

The most notable was the "huge setback" suffered by the UN.

"The simple fact for all to observe is that the United Nations, as an organization, has failed. It has failed in its most fundamental and historic mission, namely, to prevent war.

"Serious back-to-the-drawing-board action is needed for the UN. We have to take a re-look at the UN's composition and its functions. Also at the role, function and composition of the Security Council and the veto system," Van der Merwe said.

(Xinhua News Agency March 26, 2003)