February 17, 2003	Monday	Zul Hijjah 15, 1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window)

NEW YORK, Feb 16: US National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice said on Sunday that the United States was striving to win support for a new United Nations resolution on Iraq despite stiff opposition to war worldwide.

She told NBC news programme “Meet the Press” that calls for more time for UN inspectors to hunt for illegal Iraqi weapons relieved pressure on President Saddam Hussein to disarm.

“Continuing to talk about more time is basically going to relieve pressure on the Iraqis to do what they must do,” Ms Rice said responding to a question about French support for an additional report from inspectors to the Security Council next month.

“It is time for this to end, enough is enough,” Ms Rice said. She said the United States would soon abandon a diplomatic solution to the crisis over Iraq.

“We are in a diplomatic window, but it cannot last very much longer,” she said. “It will have to come to an end pretty soon.”

She said however that Washington would first try to get another UN Security Council resolution on Iraq if it would advance the goal of disarming the Iraqi regime.

“We need to keep the pressure on Saddam,” Ms Rice said.

She said the United States had not set deadlines in its aim of disarming Iraq of its alleged banned weapons.

“The UN Security Council is unfortunately getting a history of being unable to react,” Ms Rice said. “The Security Council needs to show resolve.”

Diplomats at the UN said that a new resolution could be floated by the US and Britain by the middle of this week. They want to see the text, whether it would include explicit authorization of use of force, or whether an ultimatum or deadline addressed to Iraq for voluntarily eliminating its weapons of mass destruction, or whether some have conjectured that it would contain a simple statement that Iraq in is material breach.

Asked if the United States could count on enough votes for a new resolution on Iraq, Ms Rice said: “We are prepared to work towards that end. We will see where we come out.”

NEW RESOLUTION: Meanwhile, shaken by an outpouring of anti-war sentiment, the United States and Britain began reworking a draft resolution to authorize force against President Saddam Hussein.

Diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the final product may be a softer text that does not explicitly call for war.

Pakistan’s Ambassador Munir Akram said: “The situation is very fluid and so is the language right now.”

He told Dawn that “Pakistan would naturally have to determine its position on a possible text resolution bearing in mind its language as well as the determination of the inspectors views, whether they could achieve elimination of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction through inspections process.”

Mr Akram asserted: “Pakistan has already expressed its preference for a peaceful solution and we would wish to exhaust all possibilities to achieve such a peaceful solution even at this later stage.”

He was quoted as saying by the Associated Press that “a resolution giving President Saddam an ultimatum to relinquish power or be removed by force was still an option.” But Akram said it would be very hard for Pakistan — a key ally for the United States to vote in favour of any resolution authorizing war.

In diplomatic terminology, coupling the consequences with “material breach” would be tantamount to an authorization.

Adding to the pressure, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in an interview on Saturday with Abu Dhabi Television that another resolution, following up on Resolution 1441, which was passed in November, would be necessary if force was used against President Saddam.

“I think a second resolution, following through on the conditions of 1441, is necessary,” Mr Annan said.

Before Friday’s dramatic Security Council meeting, where weapons inspectors gave a relatively favourable accounting of Iraq’s recent cooperation, US and British diplomats said they had been preparing a toughly-worded resolution that would give them UN backing for military action.

British diplomats had said then that any resolution would have to include an authorization of force. They described working versions of the draft as short, simply worded texts that found Iraq in “material breach” of its obligations and reiterated that Saddam now faces “serious consequences” as a result.