Chief UN weapons inspector disagrees with US

Blix assessment: The chief UN weapons inspector, Dr Hans Blix, yesterday offered an assessment of Iraqi co-operation on disarmament…

Blix assessment: The chief UN weapons inspector, Dr Hans Blix, yesterday offered an assessment of Iraqi co-operation on disarmament sharply different from that advanced by the United States as a reason for war.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell said last week that Iraq had failed to make a strategic decision to get rid of its banned chemical and biological weapons.

Dr Blix told a news conference at the UN, however, that Iraqis had recently shown a more proactive attitude in detailing what happened to its weapons of mass destruction allegedly destroyed after the Gulf War in 1991.

"We have never asserted that weapons of mass destruction were left in Iraq," Dr Blix said, just that they were "unaccounted for".

READ MORE

The amount of information given to the inspectors up to January was "really not convincing", but recently they had been "showered by letters" that had yet to be analysed in a sober manner.

"I don't think we can say there has been any breakthrough, no not yet," Dr Blix said, but "in some cases there have been new things".

After the collapse of diplomacy at the UN in a welter of bitter accusations on Monday, there were attempts by Washington to restore an atmosphere of co-operation yesterday.

The United States needs a new resolution from the Security Council to ensure food and aid distribution by UN humanitarian agencies in a defeated and possibly devastated Iraq.

"We move into a new phase of diplomacy," said State Department spokesman, Mr Richard Boucher, explaining the focus would also be on dispensing food and continuing Iraqi oil exports after the war.

President Bush called the leaders of Russia and China, Presidents Vladimir Putin and Hu Jintao, to explain his ultimatum on Monday to strike with "the full force and might" of the US military, unless President Saddam Hussein and his two sons left Iraq within 48 hours.

"The two openly acknowledged that they don't see eye-to-eye on whether or not force should be used to disarm Saddam Hussein," White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

Russia's Foreign Minister, Mr Igor Ivanov, called on the Security Council to hold a session that would return the UN to the forefront of efforts to settle the Iraq crisis.

"In other words, we should bring this situation into the legal framework because only the Security Council has the right to settle such situations," he said.

Mr Powell said yesterday he would not attend a UN Security Council meeting today at which Dr Blix is due to make a report on the progress of disarmament. France and Russia, which sought to extend inspections, indicated they would be represented by their foreign ministers.

"It's not a question of the United States boycotting the meeting," Mr Powell said. "It's just that I don't particularly see a need for me to go."

Mr Fleischer said: "Iraq has made a series of mistakes, including arming themselves with weapons of mass destruction that have brought this crisis upon itself." Not to accept the ultimatum was the latest mistake and "it would be Saddam's final mistake".

A notable omission from Mr Bush's list of calls yesterday was French President Jacques Chirac, whose threat of a veto of any resolution authorising war caused much bitter comment in Washington.

However, with the US now seeking allies again at the UN, Mr Fleischer was careful to say that France was still an ally in the war on terrorism.

The French ambassador to Washington, Mr Jean-David Levitte, offered an olive branch by stating that France could assist any military coalition if Iraq used chemical or biological weapons.

Mr Levitte said: "If Saddam Hussein were to use chemical and biological weapons, this would change the situation completely and immediately for the French government. We have equipment to fight in these circumstances."

The most isolated figure at UN headquarters yesterday was Iraq's ambassador. Mr Mohammed Aldouri said no place would be safe for Americans if the US launched a war against Baghdad.

"This is a war, my dear. This is a war. So how can you have a safe place in the war?" he told a Reuters Television reporter when asked if there would be repercussions for the US.

"And you are the invader. If you are (the) invader, how you can ask for a safe place ?" he said.

"There will be killing, destruction - both sides. Your guys, our guys, and without reason," he said. "There is no justification for that. You have 300,000 guys there in the desert. They are going to kill, and certainly they will be killed also."