More Foreign Troops Likely, Bush Says

President Bush expressed optimism Friday about the prospects of persuading other nations to send troops to Iraq, even as U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned that if the U.S. wants more help in the volatile country, it must be more flexible about sharing authority.

“We do need, and welcome, more foreign troops into Iraq. And there will be more foreign troops into Iraq,” Bush told reporters at Seattle’s King County Airport. “And what that will do is, that will enable many of those troops to guard the infrastructure.

“What’s happening, of course, is -- as the life of the average Iraqi begins to improve -- those who hate freedom destroy the infrastructures that we’ve been improving. It’s part of their strategy. So we’ll get more people guarding that.... And that will help free up our hunter teams” searching for members of the Saddam Hussein government.

Few governments, however, want to send troops that would be subject to the control of the U.S.-led occupation authority.

Reeling from a prickly reception from foreign diplomats to the request for more help, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw met Friday with Annan to talk about how to win over other countries.

Annan said that although the United Nations would not send in peacekeepers to bolster security in Iraq, the Security Council could create a multinational force to go in with U.N. approval, but under U.S. command.

But to win the blessing of countries that had opposed the war and refused to be involved in Iraq if it meant being under coalition control, the U.S. and Britain must relent on the issue of authority, Annan said.

“It would also imply not just burden sharing, but also sharing decisions and responsibility with the others,” he said. “If that doesn’t happen, I think it is going to be very difficult to get a second resolution that will satisfy everybody.”

But the U.S. seemed unwilling to loosen its grip enough to take the hand some countries might offer. “There’s an opportunity here for the Security Council to stand up and show support for U.N. operations in Iraq, and for the Iraqi people,” one senior U.S. official said, three days after a bomb devastated U.N. headquarters in Baghdad. Yet, “we’re not interested in getting involved in any kind of a sterile debate about authorities.”

He asserted that Resolution 1483 on postwar Iraq already gives U.N. members wide latitude to contribute to the effort. “You don’t need to go back and renegotiate 1483. This is a moment to stand up and be counted.”

Asked whether he would be willing to give more political authority to the United Nations in Iraq, Bush said: “Well, I’ve always said the United Nations ought to have a vital role.... And so, yes, there will be a vital role for the U.N. As a matter of fact, we’re discussing

Bush blamed the bombing of U.N. headquarters on Hussein loyalists as well as foreign “Al Qaeda-style” fighters who want to turn Iraq into a battleground for challenging U.S. power.

“They want to fight us there because they can’t stand the thought of a free society in the Middle East,” the president said. “They hate freedom. They hate the thought of a democracy emerging. And, therefore, they want to violently prevent that from happening.”

In talks in New York, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., John D. Negroponte, resisted the idea -- suggested by French and Arab diplomats -- of setting timetables for U.S. withdrawal and assumption of power by Iraqi authorities.

Negroponte argued that the Iraqis should be the ones to set the deadlines as they develop plans for the new government, U.S. officials said.

One Arab diplomat argued that U.S. leaders’ rapid changes of heart about a broader U.N. role have made other governments wary of joining the latest discussions.

“One day, they say they won’t do it; the next day, they go to New York,” the diplomat said. “It’s hard to tell whether to take this seriously.”

Asked what the coalition might cede to win other countries’ help, Britain’s Straw said, “It’s not a question of trying to drive a crude bargain.” Rather, he said, he hoped that the international community would recognize that shoring up peace and security is a matter of common interest.

Straw said there would be intense discussions in coming days among council members and other countries that might be willing to contribute troops if there was a new resolution.

But the halls were quiet Friday, as the negotiations moved back to capitals. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, Straw and Negroponte had decamped for vacation homes in the Hamptons before the end of the day, although Powell and Straw were scheduled to meet again over the weekend with their wives.

In a surprise move, Mexico introduced a resolution that has captured the support of the rest of the council.

Along with France and perhaps other countries, Mexico put forward a measure to ensure the protection of humanitarian workers. But its introduction has caused a surprisingly tense standoff with the U.S. over a section referring to the International Criminal Court, which Washington opposes.

A vote is scheduled for Monday, but the U.S. said it would not support the resolution unless Mexico dropped the section. The resolution, supported by the 14 other members of the council, puts the U.S. in the awkward position of having to reject the same themes of enhancing security that they have been sounding.

*

Reynolds reported from Burbank, Farley from the United Nations and Richter from Washington.