Posted on 03/13/2003 12:47:40 PM PST by knak
PARIS (Reuters) - France, Germany and Russia on Thursday flatly rejected British proposals aimed at breaking a deadlock over a second U.N. resolution, reducing the chances of Washington getting United Nations backing for a war on Iraq.
French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said Britain's idea of setting Baghdad specific tests of compliance with U.N. weapons inspectors was unacceptable as it was still based on the idea of setting a deadline for military action.
Noting the British proposals did not address the key issue of seeking a peaceful end to the showdown with Iraq, Villepin said Paris rejected the "logic of ultimatums" -- a stance the British government angrily labeled "extraordinary."
Later, Villepin told reporters France was still keen to preserve U.N. Security Council unity on Iraq and was open to all possibilities that would lead to a solution to the crisis.
"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 and we are working toward that. France confirms its openness to seize all opportunities," he said.
Villepin's Russian counterpart Igor Ivanov reiterated that, like France, Russia would vote against any U.N. resolution opening the way for military strikes, indicating London and Washington were far from swaying a French-German-Russian front against war.
France and Russia both hold veto power in the 15-member U.N. Security Council. Germany is one of 10 temporary members.
"We cannot accept the British proposals as they are based on a logic of war, on a logic of an automatic recourse to force," Villepin said in remarks broadcast by French television.
"The proposal from Britain, the United States and Spain sets an ultimatum, March 17. We think that is not acceptable," he said, adding that an acceptable draft resolution would offer a "reasonable" timeframe for inspections and no ultimatum.
Bernd Muetzelburg, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's adviser on foreign and security policy, said while Germany was not against specific disarmament demands, it could not back Britain's idea of compliance tests as they still implied authorization for war.
ULTIMATUM AT ISSUE
As Ivanov cut short a working visit to Tajikistan and headed to Moscow to examine the British proposals, Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov told Russia's Interfax news agency that Moscow would block any U.N. resolution containing ultimatums.
"When (chief weapons inspector) Hans Blix spoke to the U.N. Security Council on March 7 about solving key disarmament questions, in some ways in line with the proposed British 'tests', he spoke of a timeframe of several months," he said.
"During the continuing consultations in the U.N. Security Council, Russia will be guided by a principal approach: we are against any resolutions with ultimatums, which automatically pave the way for war."
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the staunchest supporter of Washington's push for military action, on Wednesday proposed setting Iraq six specific disarmament tests.
Council members are due to meet on Thursday to consider the British proposal, aimed at winning support for a draft U.N. resolution authorizing a war backed by Washington, London and Madrid, but opposed by veto-wielders France, Russia and China.
Ahead of the meeting, Britain offered a new concession by offering to drop a demand for President Saddam Hussein to appear on Iraqi television and own up to past illegal weapons programs.
Britain, council diplomats said, also was willing to give a substantial extension to the March 17 ultimatum. But the United States objected to anything more than a "very, very" modest extension.
A German government source said a Security Council compromise on Iraq is unlikely, even if a vote to authorize force against Iraq is put off until next week.
"Whether it takes one or two days longer won't make a difference," the government source said.
The sponsors of the resolution want to achieve the minimum of nine Council votes needed for it to pass, saying that would mean a moral victory even if France, Russia and China veto it.
President Bush has vowed to go to war with or without U.N. backing, but military action without a new U.N. resolution could threaten Blair's political survival, with strong opposition to war from within his ruling Labour party. (Additional reporting by Clara Ferreira Marques in Moscow)
Well, at least they took time to consider the plan in depth. That's a positive development. It's when they dismiss things out of hand that you know the process has broken down completely.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.