New Delhi: Notwithstanding a strong anti-war lobby and a possible UN veto, Britain on March 15 declared that it would go along with the US in case military attack became inevitable on Iraq "outside" the United Nations framework.

Not many would "shed a tear" if President Saddam Hussein is replaced, it feels.

"In the face of an unreasonable veto (of the second UN Security Council resolution for military action), we will be prepared to take action outside the UN framework," British High Commissioner Sir Rob Young said.

But Britain would continue to "very energetically" try to bridge the gap within the Security Council, he said in an interview.

He, however, stressed there was already a legal basis under the UNSC Resolution 1441, which permits use of force if the Iraqi President failed to fully comply with its provisions to disarm.

Asked about the opposition from several countries, including India for a change of regime in Baghdad by outside force, Sir Rob said, "Nobody in my country believes that Saddam Hussein is going to do much more even if we give him another two to three months. He is not being serious about disarmament to date."

Accusing Hussein of trying to buy time to split the international community, the British envoy said, "There should be no mistake that he has a long way to go before he satisfies the UN weapons inspectors or the international community."

He said, "If Saddam goes in the process and is replaced, I don't think many people would shed a tear."

Observing that India has had a "very consistent" line on Iraq, Sir Rob said it shared the view of the international community that the onus was on Hussein to "fully" disarm and co-operate with the UN inspection for weapons of mass destruction.

Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee had in his recent statement on Iraq in Parliament also made it clear that India saw the Security Council as the focus of future action, he said, adding New Delhi has fully supported UNSC resolution 1441.

To a question, he said, India has strong traditional economic and political ties in Iraq. "It is quite right that India should play a role in the rehabilitation of Iraq and in its future economic development," he said.

Referring to March 16 summit meeting of leaders from US, Britain and Spain, he said "there is still scope for diplomatic route" to address the problem.

"We are determined to try every possible avenue to address concerns in the Security Council to bridge the current gap, in a way which would show that it remains united in pursuit of its objective of removing Hussein's weapons of mass destruction," he said.

The British Envoy stressed it was important that countries that had voiced reservations over the second resolution understand the implications of the earlier resolution 1441. "There is need for them to think carefully of the consequences of opposing the second resolution," he said.

"The UN has to line up to its own demands (for disarming Hussein). It cannot afford to fall back or pull back from the requirements of that resolution," the British High Commissioner said.

Sir Rob said the future campaign against weapons of mass destruction as also the authority of the UN and its Security Council "hinges on everyone carrying through the logic of resolution 1441. In our view it should happen sooner than later."

Asked whether Britain favoured extension of time to UN weapons inspectors as also to Hussein to disarm, he said "perhaps a few more days can be given".

But for over 12 years, sanctions, containment, inspections and threats of use of force had not worked on Iraq, he said, observing that 130 days since the resolution 1441, Hussein has only "conceded a few minor issue in an attempt to buy more time".

"Is that really the mark of a man who is serious about disarmament? I don't think so," he said.

"We are not bent on war. We do not want war. It is always the last resort. It has to be the last resort," Sir Rob said.

"But we cannot afford to let Hussein off the hook. He himself is the only person capable of changing the situation tomorrow. He can ensure a peaceful solution if he disarms. The onus is on him. It is not on inspectors and it is not on the Security Council," he said.

The British Envoy charged Hussein with not declaring a majority of weapons of mass destruction and coming out with only a tiny faction of it.

"Even now inspectors will know immediately if there is a real change of heart of Hussein. The international community would recognise it immediately," he said adding "We would be the first in the UK to regard that as a breakthrough and a threat of war receding."

PTI