Iraq Remains Defiant Despite U.N. Censure

The Security Council sent a stern and unified message to Iraq on Wednesday to retreat from its confrontation with U.N. weapons inspectors, but Baghdad remained defiant and suggested it will eject American inspectors from the country within days.

All 15 nations represented on the Security Council voted for a resolution, sponsored by the United States and Britain, that retaliates against Iraq by imposing international travel restrictions on top Iraqi officials. The resolution also promises unspecified “further measures” unless the government of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein drops its demands that the U.N. exclude Americans from the weapons inspection teams and end flights over Iraq by a U.S. reconnaissance plane on loan to the U.N.

In speeches before and after the vote, representatives of every country on the council either warned or pleaded with Iraq to change course.

“Only the compliance by Iraq with their international obligations can end this situation,” French Ambassador Alain Dejammet said in a typical comment.

The unanimity pleased the United States, which had placed a premium on attracting wide support for the measure.

“This is the unambiguous message to the leaders of Iraq: The Security Council is united in its determination that Iraq must comply,” U.S. Ambassador Bill Richardson said.

But there were multiple messages delivered Wednesday. Four influential members of the council--France, Russia, Egypt and China--coupled their chastening of Iraq with explicit warnings to Washington against the use of force.

“Iraq has taken a position that is not in the interests of any party, including Iraq itself . . . [but] this resolution contains nothing that would open the way . . . for the use of the military option,” Egyptian Ambassador Nabil Araby said.

The French, Russian and Chinese delegates also held out inducements to Iraq by suggesting that they would support a Security Council review of Iraq’s complaints against the weapons inspectors if Baghdad reversed its ultimatum.

Iraqi officials passed up, without explanation, an opportunity to appear before the council. But in statements to the media, they responded with renewed threats. Even before the council met, Foreign Minister Mohammed Said Sahaf in Baghdad said Iraq will expel the six Americans working for the disarmament commission there, perhaps within days. He repeated warnings that Iraq is ready to shoot down the U.S. reconnaissance plane and threatened attacks on U.S. and British warplanes that patrol U.N.-imposed “no-fly” zones over northern and southern Iraq.

Sahaf also appealed to other Arab countries to forbid U.S. aircraft from using bases in their nations for flights over Iraq.

In New York, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tarik Aziz, who has been meeting with officials at the U.N. since Monday, shrugged off the Security Council action.

“We can’t accept the resolution because we consider it an unjust resolution,” he said in an interview on Cable News Network. Aziz added that the Americans on duty in Baghdad will be expelled, but he said they are in no danger.

Earlier in the day, U.N. inspectors were again barred from weapons sites when they refused to exclude Americans from their ranks. The disarmament commission was created after the 1991 Persian Gulf War to ferret out and destroy Iraq’s chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. Under the war’s cease-fire agreement, the commission must complete its work before the Security Council can lift the oil embargo that is crippling Iraq’s economy.

Delegates here acknowledge that there is no clear way out of the current impasse. There is no deadline for Iraq to meet before the council considers “further measures,” no consensus among council members on what to do next and little enthusiasm for military action against Baghdad.

*

In a grim assessment after the meeting, Russian Ambassador Sergei V. Lavrov said he envisions the Iraqis ejecting the Americans and the U.N. pulling out its other inspectors in response--possibly prefiguring an end to the international effort to monitor Iraq’s major weapons programs.

The Russians favor a diplomatic, not military, response to Iraq, but Lavrov admitted that the Iraqis have so far been unresponsive to diplomacy. “We have to be careful we don’t paint Iraq into a corner, but we also shouldn’t paint ourselves [the Security Council] into a corner,” he said.

The U.S. contends that it already has sufficient grounds under previous U.N. resolutions to carry out a military strike against Baghdad. The United States has more than 20,000 troops, 200 warplanes and 17 ships in the region.

U.S. officials, however, have stressed their preference for a nonviolent end to the crisis. They hold out hope that Wednesday’s unanimous vote will convince Hussein that his attempts to divide the U.S. from its allies have failed.

“It is clear that the nature of the regime in Baghdad has not changed,” Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said in Washington on Wednesday. “So this is not, to borrow [former British Prime Minister] Margaret Thatcher’s phrase, the time to go wobbly toward Iraq. We must and will continue to work closely with our allies and friends to ensure that U.N. inspections resume and that Iraq does not wriggle out of its obligations.”

To achieve unanimity, the U.S. and Britain steadily diluted the strength of the resolution as it was prepared Monday and Tuesday. The toughest aspect of the measure is a ban on most international travel by Iraqi officials identified by the disarmament commission as involved in or responsible for blocking weapons inspections and making threats against the surveillance plane.

But it was not clear Wednesday how broadly that will be interpreted and how many people will end up on the list. It could range from a handful of top authorities to dozens of military and parliamentary figures. Although the restrictions are supposed to take effect immediately, bickering over who to place on the list could postpone the effective date for some time, U.N. officials conceded.

The resolution also exempts from the ban officials traveling on diplomatic business.

One of the arguments for limiting the sanctions to the travel prohibition is that it will have little effect on the average Iraqi. There has been growing concern on the Security Council and in the Arab world about the adverse effect of the 7-year-old U.N. economic sanctions on health, nutrition and sanitation in Iraqi cities.

That has helped erode international support for the sanctions.

*

Times staff writer Norman Kempster in Washington contributed to this report.