Maybe George Bush isn't interested in a new UN Security Council resolution on Iraq because somebody might decide that the cozy little arrangment between "the Authority" (i.e. the US and UK as "occupying powers under unified command") and the "Development Fund for Iraq" established by Resolution 1483 last year needs to be changed?
As the occupation of Iraq dissolves further into bloody chaos, the colonial overseers in Baghdad are keeping their eyes fixed on what is really important: Iraq's money and how to keep it. Whatever apology for a "sovereign" Iraqi government is permitted to take office after June 30 -- and U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi admits in private that he "has to do" whatever the Americans tell him to do -- the United States is making sure that the Iraqis do not get their hands on their country's oil revenues. . . .Resolution 1483 eliminated the oil-for-food program under UN authority and replaced it with the Development Fund for Iraq under US/UK control. Through the DFI all of Iraq's finances are controlled by levers at the New York Fed.
Queried on this crucial topic, the CPA has stated that it will continue to control the revenues beyond June 30 "until such time as an internationally recognized, representative government of Iraq is properly constituted." Whatever entity is unveiled for June 30, it apparently will not fit these requirements, so the hand-over date is, essentially, meaningless.
When the US invaded the Dominican Republic or Britain took control of Egypt in ages past, the imperial powers were always careful to seize the customs house first to ensure that Southern countries would not reneg on their debts and Northern creditors got repaid in full. In today's globalized financial world there is no need to physically seize a building to accomplish more or less the same thing -- funneling money from Southern countries (e.g. Iraq) to Northern investors (e.g. Halliburton).