US: Breaking his silence on Iraq, Democratic Senator Edward Kennedy has said the case for war had not yet been made, and warned that a conflict with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could provoke the use of weapons of mass destruction, lead to a wider conflict in the Middle East, and weaken the US war against terrorism.
The powerful liberal voice of Senator Kennedy adds weight to growing Democratic criticism of the Bush administration's plans to confront Iraq. This could impact on a crucial Senate debate next week on a resolution authorising President George Bush to use military force against Iraq.
The resolution, submitted by the White House, seems certain to succeed, but a growing number of Democrats are determined to define more strictly the President's war powers, and to call on him to exhaust all diplomatic measures before taking action. Most Republicans, and a number of Democrats, are equally determined to give Mr Bush strong powers.
"Anything that's going to condition what the President's going to do on whether or not the UN Security Council acts is not going to be acceptable," said Senate Minority Leader Trent Lott, as bipartisan tensions heated up.
With the Democratic Party showing signs of Vietnam-War era divisions over military action against Iraq, opponents of the rush to war were galvanised on Monday by a speech from former vice president Mr Al Gore, who said war with Saddam Hussein would hamper the more important war against al-Qaeda terrorism.
Democrats have grown increasingly resentful over having to take positions on Iraq instead of debating the economy and other domestic issues in the run-up to mid-term elections in November, which will decide control of the two houses of Congress.
Yesterday while campaigning for Republican candidates Mr Bush made the issue of Iraq personal, when he said of Saddam Hussein that he "tried to kill my dad", a reference to an assassination attempt on former president George Bush.
Iraq clearly posed a threat, Senator Kennedy said in a speech in the Senate. However, "the administration has not made a convincing case that we face such an imminent threat to our national security that a unilateral, pre-emptive US strike and an immediate war are necessary."
The first aim of US policy should be to get UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq, the Massachusetts Senator said, and the UN Security Council resolution currently being debated should authorise the use of force that would be triggered if Baghdad tried to block inspections aimed at finding chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
If that happened, Mr Kennedy said, "there should be no doubt in Baghdad that the United States Congress would then be prepared to authorise force as well." House Majority Whip Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican, called Kennedy's proposal "the most thorough and cohesive argument for complacency so far" and it would be tantamount to "subcontracting our national security to the United Nations." Mr Gore continued his assault on the Bush administration yesterday with allegations of an erosion of civil liberties under Attorney General John Ashcroft. He accused officials of ignoring signs that Osama bin Laden had been planning a terrorist attack on the US.
Speaking at a Democratic fund-raising breakfast in Wilmington, Delaware, Mr Gore claimed that the Justice Department had devoted more time and agents to investigating a suspected brothel in New Orleans than to monitoring bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network.
"Highly questionable" decisions were being made in the criminal justice system under Mr Ashcroft, said Mr Gore, who is positioning himself for another run at the presidency in 2004. "What's going on nationally, with the attack on civil liberties, with American citizens in some cases just disappearing without right to counsel, without access to a lawyer, I think that is disgraceful," he said.