BRITAIN is pressing the UN to impose a final ultimatum on Iraq after the chief UN weapons inspector reports today that Baghdad is not co-operating fully with the search for weapons of mass destruction.
The idea of a more immediate new deadline emerged over the weekend, as both Washington and London said that they were prepared to give Iraq a few more weeks to co-operate.
The gesture, which is likely to dominate discussion at the Security Council this week, is aimed at countering the impression that an American-led war is inevitable. It is also regarded as a practical move, since most of the US and British military forces heading to the Gulf will not be in position to fight until the end of February or the begining of March.
A joint Anglo-American strategy, which will probably determine the course and timing of any conflict, is expected to be decided when President Bush and Tony Blair meet at Camp David on Friday.
Last night both American and British officials were confident that Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, would accuse Iraq of failing to live up to its international obligations.
Britain is therefore considering pushing for a UN vote on a deadline similar to the six-week ultimatum to Iraq to leave Kuwait adopted by the Security Council in November 1990. It could be set as early as the begining of March.
Under that timetable, the inspectors would have to deliver a report on March 1 and then draw up a “work programme” and a list of “key remaining disarmament tasks” that Iraq must complete. Germany has asked Dr Blix and Muhamad Elbaradei, Director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to give a second report to the Security Council on February 14.
Dr Blix, whose inspection team has been working in Iraq for 60 days, will report that Baghdad did not account fully for its suspected weapons of mass destruction in a 12,000-page declaration submitted on December 7. He will also tell the UN that Baghdad has hampered interviews with Iraqi scientists, blocked the use of U2 surveillance flights over the country and developed missiles with a longer range than permitted.
A less critical assessment is expected from Dr Elbaradei, whose team has been running a parallel search for Iraq’s suspected atomic weapons programme.
Mr Blair said yesterday that the inspectors should be given more time to complete their work, but suggested that it should be weeks rather than months. “I don’t believe it will take them months to find out whether he is co-operating or not, but they should have whatever time they need,” Mr Blair told the BBC’s Breakfast with Frost programme.
He added that President Saddam Hussein’s failure to co-operate with the weapons inspectors would put Iraq in breach of UN resolutions. “If he fails to co-operate in being honest and he is pursuing a programme of concealment that is every bit as much a breach as finding, for example, a missile or a chemical agent,” he said.
Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, delivered a similar message to the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. He insisted that there was no “great rush” to war, but emphasised that the burden of proof rested with Iraq and not with the UN inspectors. “We are in no great rush to judgment today or tomorrow, but it is clear that time is running out,” he said.
The inspectors were not compelled to expose new evidence of Iraq’s “established failure” to disarm. “It is about Iraq disclosing the entire extent of its illicit biological, chemical, nuclear and missile activities and disarming itself of them,” General Powell said.
He added that Saddam had “clear ties to terrorist groups including al-Qaeda”, and that the US reserved “our sovereign right to take military action against Iraq alone or in a coalition of the willing”.
Before any military action, however, America and Britain will attempt to build a wider international consensus in the UN Security Council, which will debate Iraq in private on Wednesday.
The 15-nation Council is deeply split over the prospect of war, even though it gave a unanimous warning in November that Iraq would face “serious consequences” if it failed to meet UN demands.
Britain, which seeks UN authorisation to win allies and reassure sceptical public opinion, is trying to forge a compromise between the US and France and Germany. Diplomats said that Washington would not accept any new resolution that did not set a short deadline and contain a renewed threat of “serious consequences”.
Last week the dispute led to angry exchanges between Washington on one side and Paris and Berlin on the other. However, there were signs over the weekend that the allies may be able to resolve their differences.
A senior French diplomat at Davos distanced the country from last week’s German criticism of the US and said that, depending on the wording of the resolution, Paris would almost certainly support the US. But the French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said last night that the inspectors should continue their work for “several weeks or a few months”. Germany has said that it will not go along with any resolution authorising force.
With Germany, France, Russia, China and Syria all opposed to war at this time, the anti-war camp almost has enough absentions or “no” votes to be able to defeat a resolution without any of the permanent council members exercising its UN veto. A resolution requires nine out of 15 votes to pass, which means that a resolution authorising war would be defeated if Mexico and one other member, such as Cameroon or Guinea, joined the anti-war camp.
France and Mexico are said to be holding private discussions on a joint initiative that would invoke the time-line for inspections established by the 1999 resolution that set up the UN weapons inspectorate.
Meanwhile, Turkey, which would have a crucial role before, during and after a conflict with Iraq, urged America to return to the UN Security Council. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, leader of the ruling Justice and Development Party, made clear in a meeting with General Powell in Switzerland that Turkey would be reluctant to provide assistance if the US acted without UN backing.
