Iraqi Parliament Holds Emergency Meeting

Iraqi lawmakers convened in emergency session Monday night to consider a response to a U.N. resolution that the speaker of parliament called a “preamble to war” but other Arab governments view as the only hope of avoiding war.

The resolution, passed unanimously by the Security Council on Friday and endorsed by the Arab League on Sunday, demands that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein allow the return of U.N. arms inspectors and that he account for any chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. If he doesn’t accept the resolution by Friday, he risks “serious consequences,” which is understood to mean an attack by the United States and Britain.

Despite denunciations of the resolution during the nationally televised parliamentary debate and in the Baghdad media, Arab League sources said they believed Hussein would accept its terms, although the process could drag on for several days. The resolution, based on a British-U.S. draft, is so tough in its “zero tolerance” language that no one in Iraq could be happy with it and Hussein would lose face if he didn’t put up some kind of resistance, the sources said.

His decision to go to parliament surprised many Arab governments. But Hussein, who opposed drafts of the resolution, may want to use parliament as a cover to reverse his position: If the assembly votes for compliance, he could say he is accepting U.N. demands because he is responding to the will of the “elected” legislators, political analysts said. Debate on the resolution is expected to resume today.

The 250-member parliament is considered a rubber stamp for Hussein. If the resolution is accepted, the decision then would go to Iraq’s most powerful group, the Revolutionary Command Council, for final approval. Hussein is head of the council.

President Bush’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, rejected the legitimacy of the parliament debate.

“One has to be a bit skeptical of the independence of the Iraqi parliament from Saddam Hussein,” she said. “ ... I sincerely hope that he gets about the business of deciding that it is finally time for Iraq to comply with its obligations.”

Al Jumhuriyah, a state-run Baghdad daily, urged Arabs on Monday to “stand firm against U.S. aggression” and to “use oil as a weapon” to defeat the aggressors. Similar suggestions in recent years have been dismissed by oil ministers as impractical and are not likely to gain any support in the current crisis.

Arab governments, which generally are as disdainful of Hussein as are Washington and London, have exerted intense pressure on the Iraqi president to accept the U.N. demands. They have told him that, although they are against a U.S. attack, they will offer him no support if he rejects the resolution. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak told his senior military officers last month that if there is a war in Iraq, Hussein bears responsibility for it.

With the Security Council’s 15-0 vote on the resolution and the endorsement of the 22-member Arab League, Hussein stands alone. That, however, does not mean he is not prepared to risk war. In the 1991 Persian Gulf War, even Arab armies joined the coalition against him, but he was still unwilling to leave Kuwait until driven out.

As in 1991, Hussein has had no current success rallying Arab support. He has said an American attack on Iraq would represent a threat to the entire Arab world, that Washington wants to control the region’s oil fields, that the U.S. is trigger-happy. Many Arab governments agree with some elements of what he says, but because of their dislike of Hussein and their unwillingness to threaten strategic and economic relationships with the United States, none are willing to distance themselves from the U.N. resolution. In the Gulf War, Jordan, a longtime U.S. ally, and the Palestine Liberation Organization sided with Hussein.

Arab diplomats who have recently met with Hussein said he believes the United States plans to find an excuse to attack regardless of whether he cooperates with U.N. weapons inspectors. Washington’s talk of a “regime change” -- which has been toned down in recent weeks -- leaves him in a lose-lose situation, he has told Arab envoys. The question, political analysts said, is whether Hussein values survival over power.

“Saddam Hussein is homicidal, but he’s not suicidal,” said Judith Kipper, a Middle East expert with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.