Russia, Syria Still Wary on U.N. Iraq Resolution

Security Council members Wednesday greeted the final U.S.-British resolution on Iraq positively, with the exception of Russia and Syria, which are concerned that language in the text could still be used to trigger military action without U.N. approval.

The U.S. is pushing for a vote on Friday, hoping to wrap up nearly eight weeks of intense negotiations. After reaching basic agreement with France on Tuesday night, officials from President Bush down were working to overcome reservations by Russia, Syria and, to a lesser extent, China.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell canceled a weekend trip to South Korea to oversee the high-stakes vote. “The secretary wants to make sure he can continue to work the process, if it’s necessary,” State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said. “But we do expect we’ll get a vote on Friday.”

Russia’s ambassador to the U.N., Sergei V. Lavrov, said Moscow still had “deep concerns” that even after revisions, the resolution retained language that could allow the U.S. to strike Iraq. He added that Russia could not agree to demands on Iraqi officials and weapons inspectors that were impossible to meet.

“They’re not there yet,” Lavrov said of the resolution. “It’s a work in progress.”

Since the draft was introduced, the U.S. has amended it significantly, incorporating changes suggested by other nations. To allay concerns that the U.S. would use a resolution as a license to attack Iraq without further U.N. approval, the U.S. agreed to France’s “two step” proposal that inspectors be sent in first and, if they were blocked, the Security Council would then discuss what the consequences should be.

In a stroke of diplomatic “creative ambiguity,” the text does not insist that the U.S. wait for a council decision to take action against Iraq.

Despite the changes, the U.S. bottom line remains the same: Iraq must disarm immediately and will face “serious consequences” if it doesn’t. Though the U.S. would consult with the council if inspectors ran into trouble, Washington reserved the right to act on its own for self-defense, as authorized by Congress.

Speaking after the U.S. formally presented the revised draft to the 15-member council, U.S. Ambassador John D. Negroponte said that Washington had “come a long, long way” to satisfy the concerns of other council members and that Iraq had “a final opportunity” to disarm.

“There has been a lot of talk over the weeks about so-called hidden triggers, that somehow this resolution is intended to be used by the United States as a pretext for the immediate use of force,” Negroponte said. “President Bush has said on repeated occasions that as far as he’s concerned, the use of force -- war -- would be a last resort. He wants to give the United Nations and the Security Council a chance.”

China and Syria echoed Russia’s concerns, though not as strongly. Chinese diplomats repeated their desire to solve the problem “through political means,” but they are expected to abstain or vote in favor of the resolution. Syria, the lone Arab representative on the council, has been expected to vote against it, but it showed hints of softening in Wednesday’s discussions in the Security Council chamber.

For the first time, every delegation stressed the need for Security Council unity to send the strongest possible message to Iraqi President Saddam Hussein that his country must disarm. That chorus raised hopes for a unanimous vote but also increased pressure on the United States and its co-sponsor, Britain, to polish the resolution into something that all members could support.

“If the council this time is divided, then the mission given to the inspectors will be much more difficult,” French Ambassador Jean-David Levitte said. “So our stated goal is to be unanimous if possible, and we will do whatever possible to meet that goal.”

That message was an important one from France. Until a last-minute understanding reached with the U.S. on Tuesday, it had led opposition to the U.S.-British resolution. U.S. officials feared that if France abstained from a vote, other countries would follow suit, weakening the gravity of the message sent to Iraq.

Though French officials hailed concessions won by Paris on Wednesday, President Jacques Chirac has yet to formally approve the text. Chirac telephoned Russian President Vladimir V. Putin to discuss the new resolution, and both agreed that “ambiguities” that could be used to trigger an attack on Iraq must be removed, Chirac’s spokeswoman said. But she added that both leaders acknowledged “many improvements” to the draft.

Russia’s position remains a question mark. Though Moscow is not talking about a veto, it is dangling the threat of abstention to win further changes in the text, said an official close to the negotiations. Russia wants to ensure that only a new “material breach” of the resolution -- not past violations -- would justify an attack on Iraq and that the Security Council, not the U.S. alone, would have the power to decide on any assault.

If Russia abstains, as it did in the 1999 vote on the resolution creating a new weapons inspection regime, other nations with reservations will be likely to join it. Bush is scheduled to have what diplomats called a “pivotal” phone call with Putin today.

“It would be more difficult for France to vote in favor of the resolution if Russia abstains,” a council diplomat said. But he added that France would probably push for a few last-minute touch-ups in the text rather than abstain.

Although Negroponte presented the draft as the final version, he said a few changes were still possible to accommodate any remaining concerns.

The chief U.N. weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said there were “practical difficulties” for Iraq to complete a full declaration of its weapons within the 30-day deadline stipulated in the resolution, especially for “dual-use” chemicals and equipment in Baghdad’s petrochemical industry.

Blix has also questioned whether provisions allowing inspectors to take Iraqi scientists and family members out of the country for interviews are practical or legal. But Washington seems committed to keeping the clause, which is designed to shelter knowledgeable Iraqis from government intimidation. Negroponte emphasized that it was not an “obligation” for Blix’s team, but an “opportunity” should he choose to use it.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who has stayed largely behind the scenes in the past few weeks, said he hoped the council would speak with one voice.

“I would prefer to see a unanimous decision, 15 to 0,” Annan said. “That is when we are really effective.”

*

Times staff writer Sonni Efron in Washington contributed to this report.