Diplomatic sources said early today that Britain was considering amending its proposed “war resolution” by adding a new, short deadline for President Saddam Hussein to comply with UN resolutions before the use of force.

The initiative, which threatens to split Britain from the hard line of the US, is aimed at winning the support of wavering votes on the UN Security Council, such as Chile and Pakistan.

Diplomatic sources said that an amended resolution would effectively authorise military action but would give Iraq a final deadline to disarm. It would not, however, set a series of “benchmarks” for compliance that could take months to fulfil.

“The theory that the US has the nine votes, the Brits are not buying,” one Security Council diplomat said. “They are looking for a way out.”

Britain has long argued for a UN ultimatum for Iraq, but was pressurised by Washington into supporting a simple resolution effectively authorising military action. It is not clear whether any compromise would be acceptable to Washington, although British diplomats said yesterday that the Turkish Parliament’s refusal to allow US troops to land in the country had extended the diplomatic timetable.

Downing Street early today appeared to be unaware of the reports from New York about a possible amendment to, or watering down of, the proposed resolution 1442. A spokesman said: “I do not recognise this report. The British policy remains that we are confident that we can get a second resolution. The draft resolution was tabled last week.” The reports of the new British initiative came as the foreign ministers of France, Germany and Russia issued a defiant joint statement declaring: “We will not let a proposed resolution pass that would authorise the use of force.”

Within hours Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, had hit back, claiming new intelligence showed that Iraq was continuing to deceive UN weapons inspectors.

Citing evidence from “multiple sources”, General Powell said that Baghdad was moving weapons of mass destruction to avoid detection, and secretly ordering the production of new banned missiles, even as it publicly destroyed existing ones.

He warned the Europeans that Saddam was trying to divide the UN Security Council by “splitting us into arguing factions”.

A day of dramatic diplomatic developments and acrimonious, megaphone diplomacy began with Joschka Fischer, the German Foreign Minister, cancelling all appointments and flying to Paris for urgent talks with his French and Russian counterparts. They issued a joint statement saying that UN weapons inspections were producing “increasingly encouraging results” and vowing to block Washington’s march to war.

In an attempt to win over the six undecided countries in the Security Council before next Tuesday or Wednesday’s vote, they called for speeded-up inspections, with a detailed timetable and deadlines for Baghdad to meet UN demands in each category of weapon.

Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, who will tomorrow deliver a crucial report on Iraqi co-operation, then intervened with comments seen as helping the anti-war camp. He said that Baghdad had been more helpful in the past month. It had begun chopping-up missiles, permitted private interviews with seven Iraqi scientists, provided documents and dug up R400 bombs capable of delivering biological agents. “There has been a great deal more co-operation now,” he said. “The threat (of force) certainly has brought it there. I hope it is not too late.”

Dr Blix also promised to publish by the week’s end a list of “benchmarks” by which to judge Iraq’s co-operation — a clear boost for those who want inspections to continue.

But in a televised appearance at a Washington think-tank, General Powell insisted that Saddam’s missile destruction was a sham. He said that in early February Iraq started to move sensitive materials every 12 or 24 hours. And in mid-February, worried by the beginning of U2 surveillance flights, it started to move banned materials in old vehicles into poorer, working-class neighbourhoods.

Britain and America must win over five of the six wavering members of the Security Council — Chile, Mexico, Pakistan, Cameroon, Guinea and Angola — to give them a total of nine votes with Spain and Bulgaria, for their “war resolution” to be approved. They must also dissuade France or Russia from exercising their veto.

The Paris statement conspicuously avoided using the word “veto”, saying only that France and Russia “will assume all their responsibilities”. Ari Fleischer, the White House spokesman, said that France had used similar language before last autumn’s initial resolution giving Iraq one last chance to disarm, but eventually supported that vote.

Last night the US expelled two members of Iraq’s diplomatic mission for activities “harmful to the United States”. Nazih Abdullatif Rahman and Yehia Suaoud were accused of activities outside of their official duties, a term that can indicate spying.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Science News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Everyone will get vaccine against swine flu
• Artificial sperm and the race to build a baby
• BBC jets out stars to tout for prizes