UN begs to differ with Bush

WASHINGTON - A key United Nations weapons inspector says he would not run to the UN Security Council to report a minor, unintentional omission in Iraq's weapons of mass destruction disclosure, a stance which put him at odds with United States President George W. Bush's "zero tolerance" policy.

Under last week's Security Council resolution calling for new weapons inspections in Iraq, Baghdad has until December 8 to declare programmes and material that can be used to develop chemical, biological and nuclear arms and ballistic missiles.

The declaration is seen as a key test of whether Iraq will co-operate with UN inspectors, who plan to arrive in Baghdad as early as Monday to prepare to scour the country for weapons of mass destruction for the first time in four years.

Bush has said he would not tolerate any Iraqi resistance to inspections and has threatened military action to force Iraq to give up its suspected weapons programmes if President Saddam Hussein does not do so voluntarily.

International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, who will lead the UN teams searching for any Iraqi nuclear weapons programmes, set a less stringent standard for gauging compliance with the resolution.

"If there is a minor omission, and this is clearly not intentional, we are not running to the Security Council to say that it's a material breach," ElBaradei told a Washington conference on nonproliferation.

"If there is a pattern of lack of co-operation then we obviously have to report to the Security Council and the Security Council will decide [whether] that is a material breach," he added.

When Bush was asked on Thursday how he would define a "material breach" of the UN resolution, a term that could lead to military action to disarm Iraq, Bush was blunt: "Zero tolerance ... We will not tolerate any deception, denial or deceit, period."

The statements reflect a divergence between the hardline stand taken by the Bush Administration and a more flexible view adopted by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who has argued against going to war with Iraq on "flimsy" grounds.

In comments to newspaper reporters Thursday, Annan said inspectors needed time to work and that the US seemed to have "a lower threshold" for what would trigger war.

"Any attempt that is seen as a hasty or flimsy excuse to go to war will create problems in the [Security] Council," Annan said. "I hope we will all be patient and careful."

The White House did not back down.

"Our view is one of zero tolerance when it comes to Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime," White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters. "That means that they need to adhere to the resolution. They need to co-operate and comply."

US Secretary of State Colin Powell, speaking at a news conference in Ottawa, said the US had demonstrated its patience in the eight weeks of negotiations that led to the resolution.

"That patience will continue," Powell said when asked about concerns Washington might be hasty. "At the same time I think it is absolutely necessary that there be no confusion, no misunderstanding that if the Iraqis ... do not comply, then there will be consequences and those consequences will involve the use of military force to disarm them through changing the regime."

Powell restated the US position that if the Security Council did not react to a "material breach" by Iraq, the US would forge a military alliance against Iraq outside the UN umbrella.

"At the appropriate time we would talk to Canada about it, but I did not come with a specific request," he said after talks with Canadian Foreign Minister Bill Graham.

- REUTERS

Further reading
Feature: War with Iraq

Iraq links and resources