US negotiates its line in Iraqi sand

No more wiggle room.

The United States moves into an intense – and historic – week of negotiations on Iraq at the United Nations determined to deny Saddam Hussein the time or ambiguity to do what he's done before: evade checks on his weapons programs.

Sixteen times in the past decade the UN Security Council has passed resolutions on Iraq's weapons programs. But in just the last few days, there's been a global shift in support of the US position. And this time around, the US will be pushing for two elements missing in the past: a deadline for admitting inspectors and concrete consequences if Iraq doesn't comply.

'"Let's be very realistic: He's said 'yes' to inspections before," National Security Council Adviser Condoleezza Rice said on television Sunday. "So this time, anything that we do has to be different."

Secretary of State Colin Powell was at the United Nations again Monday, meeting with various foreign ministers and diplomats, and reiterating President Bush's exhortation last week that it must act fast and decisively with Iraq. The US wants a UN resolution by the end of the week, and a vote in the coming weeks.

Over the weekend, Mr. Powell indicated where the US plans to draw lines in the sand. Any Security Council action on Iraq must include three elements, he says: a declaration of Mr. Hussein's past flouting of demands on weapons inspections and destruction; a firm deadline on a new requirement for compliance with the UN; and wording indicating the consequences Iraq faces if it does not comply.

"We've been down this road before. If we're going to pass another resolution where we're giving Iraq another chance, Iraq has to understand there are going to be consequences," says a US official at the UN. "If you open to more than one resolution, it gives the Iraqis time to employ stalling tactics and negotiate away their obligations."

The point detailing consequences – the war Iraq faces – is likely to be the most difficult to hammer out, administration sources say, since many countries at this stage to be falling in line with UN action in the hope of cutting off the need for military action.

One "possibility," according to Ms. Rice, would be wording that frees up UN members to use force on their own rather than calling for joint UN action.

A key goal of Washington will be to fend off efforts to avoid an ultimatum for Baghdad: the French have proposed a "two-step" process that would first demand the return of inspectors, then address the issue of non-compliance. Others are talking about dividing the issues into two separate resolutions.

The US opposes any dilution, for it might allow Iraq's Saddam Hussein enough wiggle room to engage in the "cat-and-mouse game" they say he's played since the Gulf War.

In an opinion column in Sunday's Washington Post James Baker, who was secretary of state during the Gulf War, condemned the two-step approach as opening the door for Hussein to once again wiggle out of action. Calling the two-step approach "absolutely not acceptable," Mr. Baker said it "would give Saddam Hussein two bites at the apple, first by stonewalling on compliance and then by fighting the enforcement resolution."

Page: 1 | 2