Big 5 at U.N. Agree to Give Deadline to Iraq : Gulf crisis: Permanent members of Security Council settle on January, with the day yet to be decided.

The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council on Monday agreed on a January deadline for Iraq to withdraw from Kuwait after a “pause of good will” to allow Saddam Hussein to obey the council’s resolutions.

Intensive negotiations still were under way to decide whether the 1st or the 15th of January would be set as the date after which military force could be used against Iraq. Britain and the United States favored the earlier date, the Soviet Union the later.

The resolution, which may be modified in the next few days in consultations with the 10 non-permanent council members, promises that no military or other aggressive action will be taken against Iraq before January.

British Ambassador David Hannay said the council’s permanent members have decided to give Iraq’s president “the final opportunity” to comply with Security Council resolutions that call for troop withdrawals, the release of all hostages and the return of the legitimate government of Kuwait.

“It is a pause in which we are all making clear that no new measures will be taken against Iraq prior to the end of that period, after which authorization to use all measures--which is, of course, the United Nations language for measures that include the use of force--will be available,” the British ambassador said.

“There are still differences of opinion (on the deadline). They will be discussed extensively in the next few days,” Hannay added. “We are talking about a difference of a rather small amount between the 1st of January and the 15th.”

The language of Yuli M. Vorontsov, the Soviet Union’s ambassador to the United Nations, was much blunter.

“This is a resolution that will give a last chance to Saddam Hussein . . . to comply with what the world community is asking him to do. The resolution will give a time for him to think straight, knowing what the future could be, how bleak the future could be, if he does not withdraw his forces from Kuwait,” Vorontsov said.

High drama filled the United Nations as representatives of the United States, Britain, France, China and the Soviet Union--the five permanent Security Council members--met three times in 24 hours. They were seeking to hammer into final shape the historic resolution that would, in effect, authorize a multinational attack on Iraq’s occupation army in Kuwait and possibly on Iraq itself.

The council is scheduled to convene Thursday with Secretary of State James A. Baker III in the president’s seat to consider the use-of-force resolution. But some diplomats said the actual vote could come Friday--the last day before the United States must yield the presidency of the council to Yemen, which has shown some sympathy to Iraq. The council presidency rotates once a month.

U.S. diplomats, confident that they have enough votes to ensure the resolution’s passage, lobbied other council members, including the seven nonaligned nations holding Security Council seats.

And late Monday, U.S. Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering briefed council members on the latest draft resolution by the “big five.”

The document demands that Iraq obey previous votes of the council, including immediate and unconditional withdrawal of its forces from Kuwait. The resolution authorizes the use of military force in January and requests the states concerned to keep the Security Council regularly informed on the progress of any actions taken against Iraq.

“I think we are going to have a very serious resolution,” Vorontsov said after that meeting.

“This gives a very strong signal to Iraq’s government that members of the Security Council meant business from Day One,” said Mohammed Abulhasan, Kuwait’s U.N. ambassador. “. . . This is a deadline for him that the patience of the international community is drawing very thin.”

U.S. officials professed confidence Monday that they had at least the required number of votes--nine--to pass the resolution.

But among the five permanent council members, it was unclear whether China would abstain or vote for the measure. Chinese sources at the United Nations said the phrasing of the resolution--which avoids the word force-- no longer posed a problem. But they indicated that the Chinese government still was uncomfortable about setting a deadline in January.

“There will be big bargaining,” a Chinese source said.

The United States, after intensive lobbying of council members by President Bush and Baker, remained confident.

“There is wide agreement now,” said a U.S. diplomat.

And Bush, departing the White House on Monday morning for a two-day visit to Mexico, gave a happy thumbs-up sign when he was asked if he had the necessary votes to carry the resolution.

As a prelude to the council’s vote on authorizing the use of force, a delegation of Kuwaiti refugees traveled Monday to New York to prepare to testify before the council today. They are expected to detail allegations of atrocities by Iraqi troops, ranging from rape to the removal of incubators from Kuwaiti hospitals.

Western nations believe that today’s council meeting will serve as a consciousness-raising session on events in Kuwait since Iraq invaded the neighboring sheikdom Aug. 2.

At Thursday’s meeting, a number of foreign ministers will occupy seats in the Security Council’s ornate chambers to reinforce their nations’ intention to oust Iraq from Kuwait. Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze will lead his country’s delegation.

Since the invasion, the Security Council has passed 10 resolutions against Iraq--all by at least 13 of the council’s 15 votes. Both Cuba and Yemen have abstained or voted against several of the resolutions, and neither nation is expected to cast its ballot in favor of the latest effort to pressure the Baghdad government.

Hannay stressed Monday that the council still was in the early stages of its consultations and that other members might put forth proposed changes to the text agreed upon by the five permanent members.

“The five will not be introducing amendments because they have had extensive consultations among themselves,” the British ambassador said.

Aboard Air Force One as Bush traveled to Mexico for a meeting with President Carlos Salinas de Gortari, White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater said setting a deadline “lets Saddam Hussein know exactly what kind of time frame we’re talking about.”

“It lets everyone know exactly how strong our intentions are,” Fitzwater said.

Times staff writer James Gerstenzang in Monterrey, Mexico, also contributed to this article.