US administration ' 'will not be tied to the will of the UN'

US SECRETARY OF STATE Colin Powell has warned that the Bush administration would not be tied to the will of the UN, as the US was taken to task for its draft UN resolution on Iraq, with a majority of Security Council members opposing language which could authorise Washington to launch a war in Baghdad.

Although the US administration has said it expects a swift end to the seven weeks of negotiations, it was clear that staunch opposition from powerful players such as Russia, France and China would mean more time, and possibly more compromise, to win support for the draft.

"We have consistently found that we need more time ... than we originally sought," said Britain's UN Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock. Britain is a co-sponsor of the US draft resolution.

Diplomats said it would take several days of consultations in capitals before the council could reconvene.

In Washington, US Secretary of State Colin Powell said debate would probably be concluded toward the end of next week but he warned that the Bush administration would not be tied to the will of the UN: "There is nothing that we would propose in this resolution or we would find acceptable in a resolution that would handcuff the president of the United States in doing what he feels he must do." Mr Powell spent the day on the phone with foreign ministers from Russia, Britain and France.

The five veto-holding members of the council are deeply split over Iraq. The US and Britain want the Security Council to approve a resolution threatening Saddam Hussein with retaliation if he fails to comply with a tough new inspections regime.

Russia, France and China want to give Iraq a chance to co-operate before discussing any consequences.

In an effort to lure support, Washington signalled a readiness this week to make minor concessions involving a weapons inspection regime. The suggestions were quietly welcomed, but did not pierce the core of the debate over whether the US was seeking the authority to act unilaterally should Iraq fail to comply with inspectors.

"Some paragraphs can still be regarded as the right to automatic use of force," said Deputy Russian Ambassador Gennady Gatilov. "This is the main problem." He said Russia wanted written assurances in the resolution that it will not trigger military action.

Diplomats said Washington could be willing to offer such assurances privately. In the meantime, US officials said they were sticking to the draft's basic principles.

France and others had originally complained that references in the draft finding Iraq in "material breach" sanctioned the future use of military force even before inspectors had a chance to test Iraq's sincerity to comply.

Yesterday, it was less about the exact wording and more about the concept.

"We don't want any hidden triggers and we made that clear, as did a majority of the council members," one French diplomat said.

In private consultations, France sought to soften the two references to "material breach," but it was unclear whether the US would agree to the suggestions.

Much of the opposition during yesterday's session focused on a paragraph which recalled a previous resolution on Iraq authorising member states to "use all necessary means" to restore international peace and security.

The White House said it will not be "handcuffed" by the UN.

Hunting for hidden chemical and biological weapons through renewed UN inspections could take months, Colin Powell said, and US president George Bush will reserve the right to use force against Iraq.

Refusing to co-operate with the inspections is "an immediate red line," Powell said.

"At no time will the United States foreclose its ability to act in its interest in accordance with its constitutional obligation to protect the nation and protect the people," he said yesterday in Washington.