THE United States poured cold water on Germany’s bid to become a permanent member of the UN Security Council yesterday, saying that it favoured adding only two full-time seats to the top table of international diplomacy.

Washington, which can block any expansion of the 15-nation council, said that it wanted to add two permanent members, including Japan.

Bush Administration officials were quoted as saying that the second seat should go to a developing nation and that Washington would also support the addition of up to three new rotating non- permanent seats.

The long-awaited American position was interpreted by diplomats as payback for Germany’s opposition to the Iraq war and a reward for Japan, which joined the coalition.

The new US policy also gives hope to India, another democratic US ally, which would clearly be the leading candidate for a third-world permanent seat. But diplomats predicted that it would antagonise the 53- nation African group at the UN as well as the 34 Latin American and Caribbean countries.

The announcement confounded a joint effort by Germany, Japan, India and Brazil to win approval from the 191-nation UN General Assembly for six new permanent members to sit alongside Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States. The so-called Group of Four had threatened to push for a vote next week on a framework resolution, to be followed in several weeks by another vote, deciding which countries would get the new permanent seats. Their plan — which is supported by Britain and France — calls for the six new permanent seats to be filled by Germany, Japan, India, Brazil and two African powers.

But splits among the Group of Four had begun to emerge even before the American announcement, with Germany pressing for quick action while Japan wanted to move more slowly.

Nicholas Burns, the US Under-Secretary of State, described the Group of Four’s proposal for six new permanent members and four new non-permanent members as “not very digestible”.

The United States will spell out its preferred criteria for candidates at the UN next week, arguing that a country’s size and population, military capacity and potential to contribute to UN peacekeeping should be important considerations.

Other factors should be a country’s record of democracy and human rights, its financial contribution to the UN and its stance on counter-terrorism and non-proliferation. “This is a new American idea,” Mr Burns said. Any changes to the composition of the UN Security Council need ratifying by two-thirds of the General Assembly and all five current permanent members.

Times Recommends

• Should Knox’s trial even have reached the courtroom?
• 'Was it real?' The US bailout nightmare
• Iranian opposition plays the long game