New U.S. Proposal on Iraq Challenged
1 hour, 40 minutes ago
By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer
URL:http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=540&ncid=71...
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Russia and France challenged the new U.S. resolution on Iraq Friday, introducing rival proposals eliminating tough U.S. language that they fear could authorize military force. But President Bush (news - web sites) insisted a new resolution must have "consequences."
AP Photo
Reuters
Slideshow: Iraq and Saddam Hussein
Annan Returns From Central Asia
(AP Video)
Related Links
• Highlights of U.S. Iraq Resolution (AP)
The circulation of rival Russian and French texts was seen as the opening salvo in a new round of negotiations in the divided U.N. Security Council, which is under U.S. pressure to adopt a strong Iraq resolution.
U.S. Deputy Ambassador James Cunningham said Washington wants a vote by the end of next week.
The United States responded to the new texts by formally submitting its resolution to the Security Council to ensure it remains the basis for discussion. The Russian and French proposals could also be introduced, but the U.S. move meant its resolution would likely be voted on first.
At the end of more than four hours of closed-door consultations Friday, many council members said they wanted consensus on a single resolution. Serious differences remain, however, over how tough that resolution should be.
Russia, Iraq's closest council ally, circulated a text eliminating all U.S. references to "material breach" and "serious consequences" — language it says could trigger a military attack if Iraq obstructs inspections. It would also ignore nearly all U.S. proposals to broaden the powers of weapons inspectors.
France, which sees its proposal as a possible bridge between Moscow and Washington, also removed references to "material breach."
And while the U.S. draft includes a general warning of "serious consequences," the French proposal would link the "serious consequences" to a reported failure of Iraqi compliance.
French diplomats said their proposal — which also waters down U.S. designs for new inspections — had the support of a majority of the 15 council members during Friday's closed-door meeting: Mexico, Cameroon, Guinea, Ireland, Mauritius, France, China and Russia. Syria opposes any new resolution.
For adoption, a resolution must receive nine "yes" votes and no veto by a permanent member — the United States, Russia, France, China and Britain.
"It's a good day for us," a French diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We think our text should be a good compromise. We think it's possible."
Bush discussed Iraq on Friday with Chinese President Jiang Zemin (news - web sites) and said afterward that he would not accept a weak resolution. "Let me put it bluntly: There must be consequences," he said.
Negotiations on a new resolution have been ongoing since Bush addressed the General Assembly on Sept. 12, warning that if the Security Council didn't act decisively to disarm Saddam Hussein (news - web sites), the United States would act on its own.
A few days later, Iraq announced it would allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return after an absence of nearly four years.
Cunningham, the deputy U.S. ambassador, insisted the United States wasn't seeking a green light to attack Iraq.
"We didn't bring this issue into the Security Council to look for authorization to use military force," he said. "We brought it into the Security Council to send a clear message to Iraq and to strengthen and reinforce the inspections regime so it can have a chance at success."
As part of a lobbying effort, U.S. officials handed out a list of past Security Council resolutions and statements on Iraq that used the phrases "material breach" and "serious consequences" to reinforce their argument that the new resolution was building on previous texts.
Cunningham said the United States listened to the other council members' concerns and was looking forward to hearing the views of chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and Mohammed ElBaradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency. They were to brief the council Monday.
"After that, I think we'll be in a good position to look at how we get forward to come to conclusion on the resolution next week," Cunningham said.
China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Yingfan, who opposed the U.S. references to "material breach" and favored the French version of "serious consequences," said he hoped for "some calm and sober thinking" by members over the weekend.
The aim, he stressed, must be to merge the three texts into a single resolution supported by all council members. |
