U.N. Demands Resupply of Embassies in Kuwait : Diplomacy: The Security Council moved to hold Iraq responsible for financial claims and human rights violations.

The U.N. Security Council, seeking to increase pressure on Saddam Hussein, voted Monday to demand the resupply of beleaguered Western embassies in Kuwait city and to establish an initial framework for financial claims against Iraq for its August invasion.

Council members also urged countries to collate information about Iraq’s human rights violations as a step toward determining Iraq’s responsibility for war crimes.

The Security Council demanded that Iraqi authorities “immediately cease and desist” from taking hostages and mistreating citizens of Kuwait and other countries.

The vote was 13 to 0, with Cuba and Yemen abstaining. It was the ninth U.N. resolution condemning Iraq since its invasion of Kuwait on Aug. 2.

Later, in a well-publicized move to underscore the seriousness of the situation, high-ranking military officers from the five permanent Security Council nations met informally at the French mission to discuss Persian Gulf strategy. A communique stressed that the participants were the most senior military officers ever present at such a meeting.

As schoolchildren flocked to the United Nations on a perfect fall day, a mood of grimness gripped the 15-member Security Council.

In an hourlong speech preceding the vote, Iraq’s U.N. ambassador raised the specter of war.

“The U.S. and its allies are sounding the drums of war when it commits acts of aggression against Iraq and describes such acts as peace measures,” Abdul Amir Anbari charged.

The Iraqi representative argued that Britain and the United States are insisting on “the destruction of the military potential of Iraq” and that “the aggression is being prepared in advance by the U.S. in coordination with” the Israeli government.

Ambassador Anbari compared the United States and its allies to “moths circling around a light,” likened them to 19th-Century colonialists and accused the Bush Administration of trying to grab Arab oil fields.

After the Security Council vote, U.S. Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering scorned the Iraqi’s speech. For Iraq to attempt to behave protectively toward Kuwait is “like bringing the fox in to build the henhouse,” he said.

The U.S. ambassador charged that Iraq’s interpretations of the U.N. Charter are an “affront to human decency and dignity.”

During his formal remarks to the council, Pickering issued a stern warning.

“I want to underscore one point,” he said. “Every nation has a duty to protect its citizens. This is a fundamental obligation. The United States will do that which is necessary to meet its obligations to its own citizens.”

And President Bush, speaking to reporters at San Francisco International Airport on Monday, commented:

“The concept of starving embassies is unconscionable and inhumane, and the world reacts angrily against that kind of thing.”

In voting once again to condemn Iraq, the Security Council briefly moved away from its intense concentration on Israel over the killing of 20 Palestinian demonstrators in Jerusalem on Oct. 8 and refocused attention on the takeover of Kuwait.

The council stressed the “urgent need” for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Iraqi forces from Kuwait and the restitution of that nation’s sovereignty and the authority of its legitimate government.

The council’s resolution condemned the occupying forces for taking hostages, mistreating Kuwaiti citizens and others, destroying property, including hospital supplies, and forcing Kuwaitis to become refugees.

Council members said they were alarmed by the present crisis “directly threatening international peace and security” and were seeking to “avoid further worsening of the situation.”

The Security Council demanded that Iraq allow immediate access to “food, water and basic services necessary to the protection and well-being” not only of diplomatic and consular missions in Kuwait but of all people in the nation.

It called upon President Hussein to rescind his orders for the closing of embassies in Kuwait city.

Several provisions stood at the heart of the resolution, which was aimed in part at setting up a framework for collecting monetary compensation from the Baghdad regime.

The Security Council reminded Iraq that under international law “it is liable for any loss, damage or injury” as a result of the invasion and “illegal occupation of Kuwait.”

And it invited nations to begin to collect relevant information regarding claims against Iraq by individuals and corporations. The resolution did not provide for punitive damages.

A number of nations, including India, Jordan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh, have suffered major economic losses stemming from the invasion.

The resolution also called upon countries to collate information on the mistreatment of Kuwaitis and others civilians and to share that information with the Security Council. Such data could provide the basis for accusations in any trials.

The council expressed “grave alarm” over the plight of non-Kuwaitis in the occupied sheikdom, including staff members of the few remaining diplomatic missions. On Aug. 24, Iraq announced that since it had annexed Kuwait and the sheikdom was no longer independent, all embassies in the Kuwaiti capital should close and their diplomatic staffs move to Baghdad.

The Hussein government ordered water, supplies and electricity cut off to the embassies. Only the British and U.S. embassies remain staffed.

The resolution reaffirmed the council’s trust in U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar to use his offices to undertake diplomatic efforts he considers appropriate in order to reach a peaceful settlement of the crisis.

Amid the harsh tone of his remarks to the council, Iraq’s U.N. representative offered some hope for negotiations. Anbari praised Perez de Cuellar and said Iraq valued his role in the Persian Gulf affair. He also cited the usefulness of the weekend visit by Soviet envoy Yevgeny Primakov to Baghdad, where he met with Hussein.

Anbari called for “more clarification . . . of the broad ideas” put forth by Primakov, but the Iraqi diplomat did not go into detail.

Western diplomats said the meeting of senior military officers from Security Council member nations was called to discuss the gulf situation and the implementation of previous anti-Iraqi sanctions set out by the council. It was understood that specific military operations were not on the agenda.