Intense efforts were under way last night to iron out the remaining differences between France and the US over a resolution on Iraqi weapons inspections for presentation to the other members of the United Nations Security Council, including Ireland.
The US, with UK assistance, has been trying to bring a resolution before the Council for the past six weeks in order to obtain UN approval for its strong stand against Iraq, threatening military force if President Saddam Hussein fails to comply with UN requirements.
Five members have veto powers and a permanent seat on the Council: China, France, Russia, the UK and the US. It is among this group that the US has sought to get initial agreement.
France, with some support from Russia, has been the most consistent opponent of military action without the direct approval of the Security Council.
The French initially wanted two resolutions, one providing for the arms inspections and another setting out the response if Iraq failed to co-operate with the UN.
The US wanted a single resolution with a "trigger" mechanism so that military action could be taken immediately in the event of Iraqi non-compliance. Differences have narrowed so that there is only one resolution but the French succeeded in amending the US draft to include two paragraphs providing for an immediate Council meeting if the arms inspectors are rebuffed or hindered by President Hussein.
The new wording highlights the Council's responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, as distinct from the US or any other individual member-state. However, anxieties remain about elements of the resolution, which appear to give an opening for possible unilateral action by the US and its allies. These were the issues under discussion by the Permanent Five at a meeting in New York yesterday.
There were conflicting reports about the likelihood of early agreement but, if consensus was reached, it was expected the draft would be circulated to the other 10 members of the Council without delay.
The non-permanent members of the Council, including Ireland, are elected for a two-year term and, although able to vote on any Iraq resolution, they will not have a veto. To be successful, a resolution requires at least nine votes, with the five veto powers either voting in favour or abstaining.
If some permanent members abstained and some of the elected 10 voted against or abstained, Ireland's vote could be crucial.
The Government's approach has been to ensure that the primacy of the Security Council is recognised and it is understood to be pleased that the explicit authorisation of force has been taken out of the draft. While a second resolution is not specifically provided for, Dublin believes it is implicit in the recognition that the Security Council would meet immediately in the event of a negative inspectors' report.