THE vote on Iraq was billed as the clash of the titans. The Organisation of the Islamic States was hoping that this was one call to arms that they would win. However, when the field was surveyed after the clash of arms, it was clear that the battle had taken place on expected lines. The vote was instructive of the world of realpolitik. Many States were caught between making a choice of incurring the wrath of the bald eagle and their angry street.

In the real world, on the side of the Coalition of the willing, Bahrain, which hosts the Naval armada of the coalition, had to make a concession to its street with its newly acquired democratic credentials by voting with the unwilling. Foggy Bottom, only too aware of Islamabad's predicament, understands that wanting to be with the faithful, Islamabad had to be allowed to be unfaithful.

In the coalition of the billing, most of the line up was on predictable lines. The only eyebrows were raised on Armenia. It is clear that Yerevan hopes to ingratiate itself with Washington, in spite of its present diplomatic support coming mainly from Moscow and Tehran in its own battle with Azerbaijan. The Texan oil barons like Azeri oil and the Armenians have only cognac to offer.

However, the abstentions were curiouser and curiouser as Lewis Carroll would put it. Chile, not happy with identifying with the new leftwing troika in Latin America also wanted to distance itself from the abject subservience of the other Iberian states. India was in a similar situation, with close ties with Iraq, yet a new found awareness of the advantages of going along with Pax Americana, it decided that it also had to deal with a domestic constituency which though not anti American was deeply suspicious of unilateralism.

After all the brouhaha, it was simply a deflated balloon.

Mandates to be extended in 2003

At some point, in the midst of all the speechifying and the rhetoric, the Commission during the current session will decide on the extension of many mandates of crucial importance for the prevention and implementation facets of the U.N. human rights programme.

First of all, with the notable exceptions of the mandates on Palestine and Cambodia, all the country Rapporteurs, Representatives and Experts are appointed for one year. In the absence of a clear resolution, the procedure would automatically be terminated.

Most of the thematic procedures have a mandate of three years. The following mandates were created or extended three years ago, or more recently extended until 2003:

- Right to development (open-ended working group and independent expert)

- Structural adjustment policies (open-ended working group)

- Right to adequate housing (Special Rapporteur)

- Right to food (Special Rapporteur)

- Arbitrary detention (working group, five experts)

- Independence of the judiciary (Special Rapporteur)

- Violence against women (Special Rapporteur)

 -Human rights defenders (Special Representative)

The mandates of the two standard-setting working groups (respectively on the draft declaration on indigenous peoples' rights and on the draft convention on enforced disappearances) have also to be extended. Since the standard-setting process is based on consensus, this does not seem to be a contentious issue.