BRUSSELS: US President George W. Bush may or may not succeed in securing United Nations backing for his planned war against Iraq. But even before the first shots are fired against Baghdad, America’s hardline Iraq policy is tearing apart both the 19- member North Atlantic Treaty Organisation and the 15-nation European Union.

An unprecedented decision by France, Germany and Belgium on Feb 10 to veto US calls for contingency planning to boost Turkey’s defences in case of an Iraqi attack has plunged Nato into its worst crisis since it was established as an anti-Soviet defence pact 54 years ago.

The EU too is shaken by divisions over Iraq, with Britain, Spain and Italy enthusiastically espousing America’s cause but France and Germany preaching caution.

“We can disarm Iraq without war. I see it as my responsibility to exploit that opportunity,” German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder told the Bundestag on February 13, adding: “Every means to achieve a peaceful resolution of the conflict has to be exhausted and that means continuing inspections.”

But British Prime Minister Tony Blair has warned EU leaders who meet in Brussels on Monday, that they must forge a joint stance in favour of military action against Baghdad. War cannot be ruled out, Blair insisted in a letter sent to Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis who will also chair the EU’s crisis summit.

Few in Brussels doubt that Turkey’s Nato allies will come to its aid in the event of war. But the wounds left by the acrimonious tussle between the US and its three European allies are unlikely to heal in a hurry. EU watchers are also unanimous: the transatlantic dispute over Iraq is just the tip of the iceberg. What divides the US from France, Germany and other EU states is a deep divergence over the need to abide by the global rule book.

Put simply, the EU believes in multilateral rules and the supremacy of the United Nations. For Washington, global regulations are an impediment to unilateral action.

The Iraq dispute is especially dangerous for Nato. Having lost its way after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the erstwhile Cold War organisation has been struggling to reinvent itself for over a decade. It took a public beating after Sept 11 when despite an enthusiastic decision by allies to invoke Nato’s little-used collective defence clause in favour of the US, Washington opted for bilateral aid rather than Nato assistance in its military campaign in Afghanistan.

There was a ray of hope at an Alliance summit in Prague last November, when Nato leaders promised a “comprehensive transformation” of the organisation from a body geared to fight Communist foes to one ready to battle Al Qaeda terrorists and tackle weapons of mass destruction. Also agreed was a historic Baltic-to-Balkans expansion, with Nato promising to take in new members — Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia — in 2004.

But increasingly, Nato is turning into a toothless tiger, a talking shop on security issues. And European countries, building their own defence and security arm, are impatiently waiting to take over Nato operations in Macedonia and Bosnia.

Also fractured by America’s drive to win support for military intervention in Iraq is the EU. In a controversial public statement published late last month, Britain, Spain and Italy talked up Washington’s cause against Iraq, provoking affront not only in Paris and Berlin but also among other EU leaders who favour a more cautious approach to tackling Baghdad.

Interestingly also, Washington’s tough line on Iraq has prompted unexpected divisions between current EU states and the 10 mainly central and eastern European countries set to join the bloc in 2004. Breaking ranks with Germany, their long-standing EU mentor and main source of aid and investments, all ten future members of the Union have signed up to a joint statement supporting US policy in Iraq.

US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld’s criticism of “Old Europe,” as symbolised by France and Germany and the “new Europe” of pro-American former communist nations of eastern Europe has helped widen the divide. In retaliation, Berlin and Paris have made sure that would-be members are not invited to next week’s EU emergency summit.

The transatlantic relationship is also burdened by differences over trade, the environment and even social questions like the death penalty. Also while the US focuses almost exclusively on military measures to fight terrorism, EU policymakers like External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten insist on efforts to tackle the root causes of terrorism including poverty and humiliation.