U.N. Security Council No Closer to Agreement

It was a moment that the majority of the world had pencilled into their mental diaries but once the latest report on weapons inspections in Iraq had been delivered to the United Nations Security Council, there seemed to be little change in the situation.

Both the pro- and anti-war camps considered their arguments justified by the report presented by chief inspector Hans Blix on Friday and made statements immediately afterwards that saw no shift in position or hint at compromise. In fact, as demonstrated by German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer who read from typed notes immediately after Dr. Blix had finished his presentation, many of the members had sneaked a peek at the report before hand and had prepared their statements accordingly.

There may have been no major breakthroughs but what still remains is an evident divide. The United States, Britain and Spain remain on one side, calling for a March 17 deadline for disarmament, while France, Russia and Germany insist that the destruction of the Al-Samoud 2 missiles and interviews with Iraqi scientists prove that the inspections are working.

Germany and Russia support inspections

Joschka Fischer noted that the inspections could not go on forever but that the alternatives were clear, disarmament of Iraq by war or disarmament by exhausting all peaceful means. Referring to the positive aspects of the latest Blix report, Fischer said "The progress of the last few days have shown we have efficient alternatives to war in Iraq."

Igor Ivanov, minister for foreign affairs of the Russian Federation, said thanks to pressure on Baghdad, including that brought about by the military build-up, progress had been achieved in implementing resolution 1441, and a process of real disarmament was underway. "Disarmament possibilities through political means existed, and no new resolution was needed," he noted. "We now need active support of the inspectors as they carry out their tasks."

France and Britain clash openly

However, abandoning the safe pattern of reiterating stance, France baited Britain into an open clash when Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin rejected the British proposal to give Saddam Hussein a deadline to disarm, calling it a "pretext for war". De Villepin said France, as a permanent member of the 15-member council, would not allow passage of a resolution that automatically authorized use of force. He once again threatened that France would use its veto and attacked the core logic of President George Bush's arguments for war, making it clear that Paris was now prepared for a head-on confrontation with the United States and Britain.

"Significant elements of a real disarmament can now be seen," he said. "To insist on regime change in Baghdad as the start of a process of political transformation in the Middle East is fatally flawed. Force is not the way to impose democracy."

Straw calls delay "strategy of impotence"

Britain's Foreign Secretary Jack Straw responded in passionate style. Bucking U.N. etiquette on numerous occasions by referring to his French counterpart as "Dominique", Straw said any delay now was "the strategy of impotence".

Leaning towards the French foreign minister, Straw said: "With respect to you, my good friend. There is only one possible, sensible conclusion we can draw. We have to increase the pressure on Saddam Hussein; we have to put this man to the test. The Iraqis have the answer book already ... it may take time to fabricate further falsehoods, but the truth takes only seconds to tell."

Frustrated Powell claims clear breach

America's Colin Powell, clearly exasperated, gave a low-key speech, arguing President Saddam had exhausted his last chance and was in clear breach of resolution 1441. "Iraq is once more moving down the path to weapons of mass destruction," he said. "He has not changed."

Tang Jiaxuan, China's Foreign Minister, urged Iraq to step up its co-operation "on substance", but said China saw no reason "to close the door to peace". He added: "As long as we stick to the road of political settlement, the goal of destroying Iraq's weapons of mass destruction could still be achieved."

Other Council members remain undecided

In between, the other Security Council members kept their cards close to their chests, showing glimpses of their hands but surveying the opposing sides of the argument with largely non-committal poker faces. Many pointed to examples of tangible progress made by the inspectors during the debate and suggested peaceful means to achieving Iraq's disarmament were far from exhausted. However, it remains unclear on which side they will come down on if a vote is pushed upon them.