UN: Confusion over the future of a UN Security Council draft resolution authorising war on Iraq reigned in Paris yesterday as the Foreign Minister, Mr Dominique de Villepin, rejected British proposals tacked onto the text on Wednesday.
Later however he said that France was "open to all possibilities leading to a solution to the crisis." The real problem, Mr de Villepin explained on television, was that despite the specific conditions, the resolution still specifies a deadline of March 17th and was hence "based on a logic of war, on a logic of an automatic recourse to force".
An official at the Élysée stressed that France had repeatedly made proposals for strengthening weapons inspections and even suggested a timeframe for the full disarmament of Iraq - on condition that it not end with an ultimatum leading to war.
The six undecided countries on the Security Council rejected the British benchmarks for the same reason. Technically, a diplomatic solution to the crisis was still possible, although politically it seemed unlikely due to what the official called US determination to go to war.
"Three-quarters of the planet" wanted to give a chance to inspections, but a minority say 'we don't believe in inspections and we want to do it through war'," the Élysée official said. It was possible "to go further, to set benchmarks, to turn the screws, while remaining within the logic of inspections plus pressure.
"At the moment when disarmament is working, the Americans are saying, 'Hurry up! We have to go to war!'" The French official said there was not a single positive signal coming from Washington.
Nor was the US trying to help its principal ally, the British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair.
"Tony Blair has only himself to blame," said Le Figaro, which is close to President Jacques Chirac. "In his enthusiasm for the battle between Good and Evil, he has forgotten that the bridge between America and Europe is not a one-way street."
But Mr Blair's spokesman joined criticism of Paris, accusing France of "injecting poison into the diplomatic bloodstream".
French officials seem taken aback by the vehemence of the US and British reaction since Mr Chirac announced on March 10th that "France will vote no, whatever the circumstances".
The remark was taken out of context, they say; Mr Chirac always said force could be considered if inspections came to an impasse, but believes there is no reason to use force now when inspections are working.
Mr de Villepin's apparently conciliatory remark that France would be happy to work on "benchmarks, criteria and a realistic timeframe" with the Security Council may stem from a desire to soften the opprobrium directed at France.
"We are prepared to move forward in the search for a solution," he said. "We want a solution and we are looking for consensus within the Security Council. Everything must be tried to preserve the unity of the Council."
A US-led war might appear successful in the short term, the official at the Élysée said, but it could have "devastating consequences" over the medium term. "We're saying don't do it. At the very least it's not necessary. At the worst, it's a huge mistake."
Russia also rejected the British proposals. The Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr Yury Fedotov, said Iraq would need a "certain amount of time" to meet the six disarmament demands proposed by Britain, hinting that this could mean months.
"It is already clear that the implementation of these proposals would take a certain amount of time," Mr Fedotov said.
He added: "During the continuing consultations in the UN Security Council, Russia will be guided by a principal approach: we are against any resolutions with ultimatums, which automatically pave the way for war."