WASHINGTON - In an effort to win United Nations Security Council support, the United States is backing down from its demands that a new U.N. resolution must authorize military force against Iraq if Baghdad does not abide by new weapons inspections rules.
The new U.S. approach could delay, possibly significantly, the Pentagon's timetable for war, both because of the time it would take for inspectors to do their work and for the diplomatic process if the inspection effort should fail.
The U.S. retreat suggests that the Bush administration is anxious to preserve a multilateral approach to Iraq, as Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has advocated, rather than risk going it alone, the course favored by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
Under compromise language put forward by the United States, Iraq would face unspecified serious consequences if it failed to comply with stiff requirements for the new U.N. inspections regime.
But, in a major change of approach demanded by France, Iraqi noncompliance would not automatically give the United States a green light to launch an invasion and oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, several Western diplomats said.
Instead, the U.N. Security Council would hold additional meetings and perhaps pass a new measure authorizing the use of force.
A senior White House official said last night that although the proposed resolution wouldn't spell out the consequences, it would say that Hussein will be in "material breach" if he violates any U.N. resolution.
That term, "material breach," allowed for military action to be taken in Kosovo in 1999. The official said that since no measures would be ruled out in the text, the White House believes that President Bush would have "maximum flexibility" to mete out consequences if Hussein should fail to comply.
Moreover, the official said the new U.S. proposal doesn't require a second resolution before Bush acts.
Powell, who met with chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix in New York yesterday, said a U.S.-drafted resolution would leave "no opportunity for the Iraqis to deter the inspectors from their work or to defeat their efforts. There must be a threat," Powell said. "There must be consequences for their continued failure."
But it remains unclear whether Bush could or would launch military action while U.N. diplomats are debating.
A European diplomat in New York called it unlikely. "I don't see them going [to war] by themselves in the middle of these two steps. That doesn't make sense," said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
France's initial reaction to the U.S. concession was positive, suggesting that agreement on the new approach to Iraq could come soon.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov welcomed the new proposal and said Powell told him it would be formally submitted soon. "We believe that there are favorable conditions now to preserve the unity of the global community and ensure the return of international inspectors and their efficient work in Iraq," Ivanov said in Moscow.
Ambassadors from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council - the United States, China, Russia, Britain and France - were to meet today in New York to hammer out a final deal, before sharing the document with the council's 10 nonpermanent members.
"Everything should go quickly now," the European diplomat said.
U.S. officials portrayed the outcome as a victory for their demand that Iraq submit to unfettered inspections to eliminate its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or face stiff consequences.
The new U.S. approach comes after weeks of political wrangling on how to deal with Iraq. President Bush touched off the flurry of activity with his Sept. 12 speech to the world body, in which he cautioned that the United Nations risked irrelevance if it failed to deal with the "grave and gathering danger" posed by Iraq.
An earlier U.S. draft resolution sanctioning an immediate attack on Iraq met with strong resistance.
France has pushed for a two-resolution approach that would force the United States to return to the council to authorize military action. Many countries, including Russia, favor that approach.
During an open Security Council debate on Iraq, which started Wednesday and continued yesterday, dozens of nations refused to endorse the Bush administration's demand for an authorization of military action.
The new U.S. approach could delay, possibly significantly, the Pentagon's timetable for war, both because of the time it would take for inspectors to do their work and for the diplomatic process if the inspection effort should fail.
The U.S. retreat suggests that the Bush administration is anxious to preserve a multilateral approach to Iraq, as Secretary of State Colin L. Powell has advocated, rather than risk going it alone, the course favored by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
Under compromise language put forward by the United States, Iraq would face unspecified serious consequences if it failed to comply with stiff requirements for the new U.N. inspections regime.
But, in a major change of approach demanded by France, Iraqi noncompliance would not automatically give the United States a green light to launch an invasion and oust Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, several Western diplomats said.
Instead, the U.N. Security Council would hold additional meetings and perhaps pass a new measure authorizing the use of force.
A senior White House official said last night that although the proposed resolution wouldn't spell out the consequences, it would say that Hussein will be in "material breach" if he violates any U.N. resolution.
That term, "material breach," allowed for military action to be taken in Kosovo in 1999. The official said that since no measures would be ruled out in the text, the White House believes that President Bush would have "maximum flexibility" to mete out consequences if Hussein should fail to comply.
Moreover, the official said the new U.S. proposal doesn't require a second resolution before Bush acts.
Powell, who met with chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix in New York yesterday, said a U.S.-drafted resolution would leave "no opportunity for the Iraqis to deter the inspectors from their work or to defeat their efforts. There must be a threat," Powell said. "There must be consequences for their continued failure."
But it remains unclear whether Bush could or would launch military action while U.N. diplomats are debating.
A European diplomat in New York called it unlikely. "I don't see them going [to war] by themselves in the middle of these two steps. That doesn't make sense," said the diplomat, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
France's initial reaction to the U.S. concession was positive, suggesting that agreement on the new approach to Iraq could come soon.
Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov welcomed the new proposal and said Powell told him it would be formally submitted soon. "We believe that there are favorable conditions now to preserve the unity of the global community and ensure the return of international inspectors and their efficient work in Iraq," Ivanov said in Moscow.
Ambassadors from the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council - the United States, China, Russia, Britain and France - were to meet today in New York to hammer out a final deal, before sharing the document with the council's 10 nonpermanent members.
"Everything should go quickly now," the European diplomat said.
U.S. officials portrayed the outcome as a victory for their demand that Iraq submit to unfettered inspections to eliminate its nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or face stiff consequences.
The new U.S. approach comes after weeks of political wrangling on how to deal with Iraq. President Bush touched off the flurry of activity with his Sept. 12 speech to the world body, in which he cautioned that the United Nations risked irrelevance if it failed to deal with the "grave and gathering danger" posed by Iraq.
An earlier U.S. draft resolution sanctioning an immediate attack on Iraq met with strong resistance.
France has pushed for a two-resolution approach that would force the United States to return to the council to authorize military action. Many countries, including Russia, favor that approach.
During an open Security Council debate on Iraq, which started Wednesday and continued yesterday, dozens of nations refused to endorse the Bush administration's demand for an authorization of military action.