Annan Refusing to Shoulder Latest Iraq Impasse

Secretary-General Kofi Annan is resisting Washington’s attempts to make him the point man in the latest confrontation with Iraq and has no immediate plans to intervene in the increasingly tense impasse, officials here said Monday.

Annan’s reluctance to take on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein over Hussein’s decision to halt cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors undermines the revised American strategy on Iraq and has contributed to the disarray in the U.N. response to Baghdad.

The secretary-general is vacationing in London this week, but his spokesman, Fred Eckhard, said Monday that no one should expect a repeat of Annan’s visit to Baghdad in February, when he headed off a potential American-British attack on Iraq by negotiating an agreement with Hussein to permit U.N. inspectors unrestricted access to potential weapons sites.

On Aug. 4, Iraqi officials, in what Annan has called a breach of both that agreement and U.N. Security Council resolutions, sparked the latest conflict by declaring that they would block inspections of any sites that had not already been visited by the disarmament investigators.

“He sees the current situation as a standoff between the Security Council and the government of Iraq. . . . He personally does not foresee any role for himself at this time,” Eckhard said. In a subsequent interview, Eckhard said that Annan “doesn’t see an opening at the present time.”

Council members, however, made clear that they are looking to Annan for leadership. Council President Danilo Turk of Slovenia and U.S. Ambassador Bill Richardson both said as much Monday during council discussions.

“The role of the secretary-general is essential,” said Richardson, who urged Annan to use his “skill and diplomacy to deal with this problem.”

The Security Council’s difficulty in agreeing on a reply to the Iraqi provocation was apparent Monday as the body haggled for hours behind closed doors over the wording of a tepidly phrased letter on the issue. As finally agreed, the letter calls Baghdad’s action “totally unacceptable” and declares the council’s support for the “full implementation” of the inspectors’ work despite Iraq’s threats not to cooperate.

The United States has been counting on Annan to take a strong role in the impasse. American officials want to paint the current standoff as a conflict between Iraq and the U.N. and a violation of the Annan-Hussein agreement. By casting the Iraqi action as a defiance of Annan, the U.S. hopes to gradually increase international support for tougher action against Baghdad, American diplomats say.

But U.N. officials said Annan’s view is that the Clinton administration mainly wants to avoid a potentially unpopular military confrontation with Iraq before the November congressional elections and that the five permanent members of the Security Council--the U.S., Britain, China, Russia and France--are too deeply divided to reach agreement on how to respond to the Iraqi challenge.

Lacking a credible threat of a military attack by the U.S. or unanimity among Security Council members, Annan would have insufficient support behind him in any negotiation with the Iraqis, officials said.

Annan also is said to be disappointed that the 15-member council has been unable to agree on any steps toward lifting economic sanctions against Baghdad. The council recently rejected a Russian attempt to officially recognize that Iraq has eliminated its nuclear weapons program, a decision that would have been seen in Baghdad as movement toward elimination of sanctions.

After Baghdad’s Aug. 4 announcement, the secretary-general did dispatch a special envoy to urge Iraq to resume cooperation with the inspectors. But the emissary, Indian diplomat Prakash Shah, was unsuccessful and is returning to New York. Annan also has suggested that the Security Council might conduct a “comprehensive review” of its Iraq policy, but he has not elaborated on that idea and has no immediate plans to pursue the issue.