Global Policy Forum

By John Lichfield, Rupert Cornwell and Andrew Grice

British diplomats at the United Nations are working on a compromise to avoid a head-on collision over Iraq at the UN tomorrow after France and Russia warned that they will "not allow" a new resolution authorising war in the Gulf.

Within hours of their announcement last night, Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, accused their foreign ministers of wilfully ignoring how Saddam Hussein was in breach of his every obligation to the UN. Diplomats in New York said a final short window for Iraq to disarm peacefully could be added possibly as an amendment to the resolution, possibly as an announcement immediately after the original draft resolution is adopted, or perhaps in some other way.

The amended resolution is expected to be floated when foreign ministers of the 15 Security Council countries meet tomorrow behind closed doors after hearing the latest progress reports from chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and nuclear watchdog Mohamed ElBaradei.

The front against war in the Security Council was further strengthened today when China said it saw no need for an additional resolution and believed weapons inspections should continue. Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan said the current weapons inspection resolution being carried out by the inspectors was working. "The tasks carried out by that resolution are not completed yet," he said at a news conference. "We are still working hard for a political solution and to try to avoid war. ... At this moment, it is absolutely unnecessary to put aside Resolution 1441 and introduce a new resolution."

He added that inspections "should be strengthened."

Britain started the search for some middle ground after the gulf between the United States and the UK, and Russia and France widened. General Powell said: "Some of my colleagues on the Security Council don't even want to remember, saying let bygones be bygones. But that's not going to work, we can't ignore it." He said President Saddam was still offering only "a mixture of lies and deceit and falsities" and nothing indicated that he had taken the strategic decision to disarm.

In a sometimes impassioned speech to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, the Secretary of State left no doubt that the US would go it alone if a resolution failed to pass. Indeed, while the White House and Downing Street again proclaimed confidence that it would secure the necessary nine votes, US officials hinted that Washington might not even bother to force the resolution to a vote if it concluded it would lose.

The Franco-Russian statement, also signed by Germany, appeared to commit France and Russia to using their power of veto in the Security Council, although neither government was prepared to use the "V-word". At the very least, France and Russia who also claim the support of Beijing have signalled their intention to fight every inch of the way to gather support to block the proposed US-British-Spanish resolution that would give formal approval for military action.

Earlier, Tony Blair, said: "We are confident of securing the votes for that resolution. We will carry on working to that end." Last night, the Foreign Office minister Mike O'Brien indicated that Britain wanted the UN to decide soon when the vote will be taken. "We are not looking at a very long time. A week or two is probably the timescale that we are looking at," he told the BBC's Newsnight programme.

Reports last night suggested that Britain was also working behind the scenes on an amendment to the resolution that would give Iraq more time to comply with disarmament demands and convince wavering Security Council members. A total of nine votes out of 15 are needed to push the resolution through the Security Council, possibly as soon as early next week. But last night the prospect looked remote. Dominique de Villepin, France's Foreign Minister, said: "We will not allow the passage of a planned resolution which would authorise the use of force."

Asked if that amounted to a threat to use the veto, he said "my terms are clear". France and Russia would "assume all their responsibilities", he said. Diplomatic and political sources in Paris remained doubtful last night that either France or Russia would be prepared to use the "nuclear option" of the veto, which would plunge their relations with America into a deep freeze.

M. de Villepin was quoted in the French press as having said privately that a French veto would be like "shooting the Americans in the back". His tough words yesterday and the very existence of the joint French, German and Russian statement were interpreted by some as an attempt to bounce a wavering group of three or four Security Council members into staying with the "anti-war" camp.

Similarly, the US and Britain have been putting pressure on the waverers, including Angola, Cameroon and Guinea, to join the "war" side. French sources said a veto decision would be made by President Jacques Chirac alone and only when it was clear which way the vote would go. If this is a game of political poker, both sides appear determined to play to the last card. In theory, everything depends on a further report tomorrow by the chief UN weapons inspectors, Hans Blix and Mohamed al-Baradei. But it was clear last night that both sides are preparing for an inconclusive report.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.