Blair: Saddam will remain defiant

The inspectors want to see better co-operation

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has said he does not believe Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein will comply with the United Nations over disarmament.

"There's no doubt at all at present - he (Saddam Hussein) is in breach," Mr Blair told the BBC.

What counts is that the integrity of the United Nations is upheld

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair

"I certainly believe he's not going to comply".

But he said it was important to deal with Iraq through the United Nations and that the UN process was working.

Correspondents say that is the message he is likely to convey to US President George W Bush on Friday, in what some have dubbed a council of war.

The UN's weapons inspectors, meanwhile, have said they want to see improved co-operation from Baghdad before they accept an invitation for new talks there in early February.

Scepticism

Mr Blair said the UN resolution passed in November promised that the Security Council would meet again to discuss any non-compliance by Iraq - and that process should be observed.

Current Security Council

For military action: United States, United Kingdom, Spain and Bulgaria

Sceptics or opposed: France, Russia, China, Germany and Syria

In doubt: Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan

Nine votes and no veto required to pass a resolution

Security Council quick guide

"It's not my scepticism that counts. What counts is that the integrity of the United Nations is upheld," he said.

Correspondents say Mr Blair's words indicate he is likely to push the US president to build a broad coalition for any military action against Iraq, by putting a second resolution to the Security Council.

Mr Bush has made it clear that he is prepared to disarm Iraq by force with or without the UN's backing.

The BBC's Andrew Marr says that the difference between the two leaders is only in diplomatic strategy - not in their aims.

He says Mr Blair is not trying to stop a conflict but wants to make sure that any war takes place with the consent rather than the fury of the world.

Before heading for Washington, Mr Blair shored up support among several European countries for the tough US line.

On Thursday he and seven other European leaders published an article backing a transatlantic alliance to disarm Iraq - a move which underlined a split from France and Germany's determination to avoid war.

US allegations rejected

The UN's chief nuclear arms inspector Mohamed ElBaradei has demanded Iraq make concrete steps towards co-operation if he and chief inspector Hans Blix are to accept Baghdad's invitation for talks.

Iraq has asked them to visit before they make another progress report to the Security Council on 14 February.

KEY DATES

31 Jan - Bush meets Blair

5 Feb - Powell to address UN Security Council

14 Feb - Further report from weapons inspectors

27 Mar - Blix submits new report to UN

Next steps in full

In particular, Mr ElBaradei has called on Iraq to allow his team to question Iraqi scientists without official minders present and to give permission for overflights by U2 surveillance planes.

Although the inspectors have found fault with the level of Iraqi co-operation, Mr Blix has rejected allegations raised by the Bush administration that his inspectors are being deliberately deceived.

In an interview with the New York Times, he challenged the accusation that Iraqi officials were moving illegal materials to prevent their discovery.

And he said there was no evidence to back US suspicions that scientists were being sent to Syria and other countries to avoid interviews with inspectors, nor that agents were posing as scientists for questioning.

Moreover he rejected suggestions his teams had been infiltrated by Iraqi agents and that intelligence was being leaked.

It has been suggested that some of these allegations may be brought up by US Secretary of State Colin Powell when he presents the Security Council next week with what he says will be new evidence of Iraq's failure to comply with UN demands.

Mr Blix said he hoped Iraq could be disarmed peacefully, but said the decision lay with the Security Council about using force.

"I think it would be terrible if this comes to an end by armed force... But I also know that diplomacy needs to be backed by force sometimes and inspections need to be backed by pressure," he said.