WASHINGTON: The Bush administration is contemplating an ambitious military occupation of Iraq if American forces oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, senior US officials said in offering the first detailed look at administration thinking.

US military commanders would be responsible for establishing stability and overseeing the beginnings of a democratic transformation of the country, yielding to Iraqis only when an electoral system had been installed and the search for weapons of mass destruction was well underway, the officials said.

The administration is “coalescing” around the idea, said one official, who reported that President Bush has been briefed on the “direction and nature” of the approach. While the establishment of a provisional government headed by Iraqi opposition forces has not been ruled out, officials said such a solution now seems less likely.

Officials emphasized that no formal decisions have been made. As one senior policymaker put it, “I think we’re all heading in the same direction. That does not mean there couldn’t be changes. This is not carved in stone.”

The administration has concentrated its attention on determining how Saddam should be toppled and winning support for its aims, spending less energy on what would happen next. The president and his top advisers have pledged US support for democratic rule, but planning for such a complex reform has been limited.

Under the approach discussed on Thursday, US-led forces would take control of Iraq after the fall of Saddam. A military officer, who likely would report to US Central Command, would be installed, along with a yet undetermined advisory body of Iraqis.

The military authorities would be responsible for establishing order and preventing the country from breaking apart, a possibility that deeply worries Iraq’s neighbours. Humanitarian programmes would be started and Iraq’s vast oil fields would be developed as a national source of funds.

The “core mission,” an official said, would be locating and destroying Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. In post-conflict chaos, the official said, “these weapons could fall into the wrong hands.”

After months, at a minimum, military authorities would yield to a civilian occupation as the country assembled the building blocks of political change — from starting judicial reform to electing local and national legislators, US officials said.

Only in a third phase, when elections could be held, would power be passed to an Iraqi government, officials explained. Along the way, occupation authorities would pursue war-crimes trials for Saddam and his inner circle while looking for ways to remove the influence of the ruling Baath Party.

Such an approach would be a blow to the ambitions of Iraqi opponents in exile who are pressing the Bush administration to establish a provisional government now as the foundation for a post-Saddam Iraq. Yet influential figures within the administration still favor the creation of such an interim authority, officials cautioned, saying that the debate is not over.

If Saddam were ousted before a US invasion, the administration might still use force to create a new government, especially if the leadership seemed likely to continue the Iraqi leader’s policies, an official explained: “If it is a new regime that is Saddamism without Saddam, that will not change things.”—Dawn/The Washington Post News Service.