New York: The United States and Britain are now wooing non-permanent members of the
15-member Security Council to line up nine votes in favour of their planned new
resolution finding Iraq in material breach of an early UN resolution on disarmament
and then plan to dare Russia, France and China to veto it, diplomats said.
In a change in strategy, the two apparently want to show that a majority of members
are with them. The British government is under intense pressure to have the Council
backing for any military action and even a weak majority would be considered a moral
justification for war against Iraq.
The Security Council has now decided to ask chief weapons inspector Hans Blix to
report on March 7 instead of March 1. Should the resolution come up earlier, Blix's
report might provide ammunition for a military action if it once again says that
Baghdad is not fully complying with the Council resolutions.
The language of the resolution is still being discussed between the United States
and Britain and diplomats said one area of discussions is whether President Saddam
Hussein should be given a firm deadline. Britain favours this approach, but the
United States is not very enthusiastic about it, they say.
The resolution is expected to be moved early next week, possibly on February 23,
according to a report in the 'Times', London.
Asked whether they would be able to get nine votes needed for adoption of the
resolution, British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said they have not yet started
counting the votes.
"There is no text as yet," he told reporters on February 20.
Diplomats and officials say the Bush administration, which was once trying for a
unanimous vote, has now realised that might not be possible. But it is of the view
that a resolution adopted even with only nine votes would give it moral authority to
go ahead with military action.
The administration would still have to work to ensure that there is no veto.
Apparently, it is going by the calculation that it would be able to persuade France,
Russia and China to abstain. But its strategy is unclear should that not be
possible.
Spain and Bulgaria are sure to vote with the US and Britain and that makes four
votes.
Germany and Syria would not endorse the resolution. That would leave Angola,
Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan who, diplomats say, are being pressured
both by the US-Britain duo on one side and France and Germany on the other to side
with them.
Pakistani diplomats say voting with Americans would have very serious consequences
at home, but are not sure whether Islamabad would be able to go against Washington.
PTI
