October 31, 2002	Thursday	Sha’aban 24,1423

UNITED NATIONS, Oct 30: The United States and France have moved closer to a compromise agreement on a UN Security Council resolution which would obligate the Bush administration to consult with the Security Council before launching an attack against Baghdad.

However, diplomats here said that if Iraq fails to comply with the strict inspections regime stipulated in the resolution, as proposed by the United States and Britain, the Americans would seek UN vote before launching an attack.

But the diplomats observed that US still wants “a yellow light, if not green light” to punish Iraq if the UN weapons inspections team reports non-compliance by Baghdad.

Diplomats here said on Tuesday that Paris was seriously considering new US compromise language and discussing it with others who share its views.

Referring to French demands that the Security Council meet and decide on whether or not military action is needed in the event of Iraqi defiance over the coming weeks, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said, “We essentially believe we have accommodated those who wanted an opportunity to decide this.”

He said in an interview with a French daily Le-Monde, “They have now the opportunity to decide or not to decide it, to pass a second resolution or offer a second resolution or not, and we will be part of that debate.”

Going further, Powell told the paper that in a so-called second stage, “We would certainly prefer to see the UN act in a multilateral way.” However, he made it clear that the US would not be “handcuffed” by the world body if it failed to act against Baghdad on UN weapons inspectors report.

“They could sort this out in an hour flat, but that doesn’t mean they will,” said one diplomat on the Council, expecting late sometime next week at the latest.

The US-Britain sponsored draft resolution, broadens the rights of UN inspectors searching for any of Iraq’s chemical, biological, nuclear or ballistic weapons programmes after a nearly four-year hiatus.

It warns Baghdad of “serious consequences” and twice mentions Iraq being in “material breach,” of UN resolutions dating back to a 1991 Gulf War ceasefire.

France, Russia, China and other nations consider “material breach” a hidden “trigger” that would allow Washington to attack Iraq, overthrow President Saddam Hussein and then contend the United Nations had authorized it.

Although US officials have said publicly they would not initiate military action without some kind of consultation or debate among the Security Council members, the new American proposals put this in writing. But Washington opposes any commitment to a Council vote authorizing a military strike.

INSPECTORS: Meanwhile, the UN weapons inspection team left for Washington for the second time in a month, this time for meetings with US President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

Hans Blix, the UN chief weapons inspector, and Mohammed Elbaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency are expected to explain how they would conduct inspections if they were to resume.

Blix is executive chairman of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspections Commission, which is in charge of accounting for Iraq’s chemical and biological arms and ballistic missiles. ElBaradei’s Vienna-based agency is responsible for checking for Iraq’s nuclear weapons.

The two UN officials have also expressed reservations about various US proposals in the resolution draft in front of the Security Council. They have sought that the United States should modify some provisions in the text.

One is a demand for an exhaustive list of weapons and related materials within 30 days. Blix told Council members on Monday that the deadline might be too short for Iraq to account for its large civilian chemical programmes, particularly materials used in its oil industry.

He and ElBaradei also questioned a proposal that would give them the right to take Iraqi scientists and their families out of the country for interviews.

“There would be great practical difficulties in using such authority, unless there was cooperation by the Iraqi side,” they reportedly said in their written notes to the Council.