January 11, 2003	Saturday	Ziqa'ad 7, 1423

WASHINGTON: The drumbeat of war may be slowing.

After weeks of mounting expectations that an invasion is imminent, the United States and many of the key players in the showdown with Iraq indicated on Thursday that UN weapons inspections will run on well beyond the Jan. 27 due date for the first formal report to the world body on Saddam Hussein’s cooperation.

Barring solid discoveries or new evidence about Iraq’s weapons programmes, widespread assumptions about a US-led military operation beginning in early February may also be off, according to US, European and UN officials.

“It’s wrong to assume anything has to happen in January or February. We’re not in this to call a quick war, so don’t assume any timetable,” a senior State Department official said on Thursday on condition of anonymity. “We have to exhaust the UN process to get people to come through with military and other support.”

At the White House, press secretary Ari Fleischer stressed on Thursday that President Bush has not imposed a timeline on the process. “The president has said that he wants the inspectors to be able to do their jobs, to continue their efforts, and that’s what we support,” he told reporters.

The flurry of signals from the Bush administration is in part to “puncture the bubble” of speculation about US intentions amid a rapidly accelerating deployment of American troops near Iraq, the State Department official said.

But it also reflects some of the complex realities of the process — and several reasons for caution.

Chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix is likely to ask for more time Jan. 27 if the UN teams have not yet found evidence of any nuclear, chemical or biological weapons or ballistic missiles in Baghdad’s arsenal.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who has been the strongest US ally, said Thursday that the inspections are only “in the middle” of a process and that Jan. 27 should not be seen as any kind of deadline for a decision about war.

“We’re asking (the inspectors) to step up the intensity of what they’re doing. But they’ve got to do it professionally, and they need time,” Britain’s UN ambassador, Jeremy Greenstock, told reporters after Blix briefed the Security Council on Thursday. “Jan. 27 will be another in a series of reports, and probably not the last.”

“There’s no point in going this far and then rushing into a war when you don’t have the widest possible public support. If the United States didn’t do anything when Iraq made its flawed (weapons) declaration, why do it when Blix asks for more time?” added a diplomat from a country on the UN Security Council.

“The US has to give the UN the space it needs,” the diplomat said.

The United States also is still in the throes of trying to build an international coalition for action, with support from critical players such as Turkey proving to be more difficult and costlier to secure than initially expected. The size and type of allied support in a coalition may also depend on the latitude Washington grants the inspectors — even in terms of what role Britain plays in any war, according to US and British officials.

“Blair is very vulnerable on this issue. He’s been an overachiever for the United States up to now. But he has a price, too. He needs certain things, including giving the UN a real opportunity to prove Iraq still has weapons, in order to face the political backlash, particularly within his own party,” said a well-placed official who requested anonymity.

Washington also would like to have enough evidence to avoid another major round of diplomacy to convince the world of the need to act, particularly the other permanent members on the Security Council — Russia, France, China and Britain.

Russia and France called on Thursday for what amounts to open- ended inspections.

“There is no reason to give a time limit,” France’s UN ambassador, Jean Marc de la Sabliere, said after the Blix briefing.

Key US officials are concerned that Saddam might try to pre- empt or manipulate US military plans if an air war should be launched before all ground troops and support materiel are positioned.

“Once a military action starts, there’s a real danger that Saddam will lash out at his own population — the Kurds or the Shia — or take other actions that will force us to change our own plans if we don’t have everyone in place,” the well-placed official said.

The administration must also deal with the fact that a growing number of players want to pursue alternatives to war, including time to allow the military buildup to pressure Iraq’s military to oust Saddam or pressure him to surrender power.

“There’s a new dynamic among a number of countries that are very interested in finding ways to get Saddam to depart the scene some other way — either through a coup or exile,” the well- placed source said.

Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al Faisal, backed by conservative Persian Gulf states, is reportedly leading behind-the-scenes discussions in the Arab world. He may try to set up a meeting with Iraqi officials, US officials said Thursday. —Dawn/LAT-WP News Service (c) Los Angeles Times