Diplomatic battle over Iraq kicks off

Diplomatic battle over Iraq kicks off

Greg Barrow BBC UN correspondent

The campaign to win hearts and minds on the United Nations Security Council has started.

Hard bargaining behind the scenes

As soon as the British Ambassador, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, submitted draft proposals for a second UN resolution that could pave the way for military action against Iraq, diplomats here immediately knew this was the signal for an intense round of diplomatic jousting.

Over the next few days and weeks, the focus of attention will shift periodically like a pendulum from UN headquarters to the capital cities of nations represented on the Security Council, and then back again.

The governments of Security Council members are currently poring over the details of the draft resolution, while at the UN, diplomats are meeting privately to discuss the relative merits of one initiative or another.

On Tuesday, the Chilean mission to the United Nations hosted a gathering of the 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council.

They invited the French Ambassador, Jean-Marc de la Sabliere, round to give them the low down on the memorandum put forward by Paris that would see an extension and reinforcement of the UN inspection mission in Iraq.

Diplomatic courtship

On Wednesday, the war camp gets a chance to put its case forward at a planned meeting hosted by the Spanish mission to the United Nations.

COUNCIL VIEWS

For military action: US, UK, 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

Can US sway the council?

Security Council quick guide

Views on Resolution 1441

Diplomats say the US ambassador, John Negroponte, will be invited along to press Washington's case.

This is the life of UN Security Council diplomats at the moment.

They have become embroiled in a diplomatic courtship as Washington and London try to win their votes, but so far, few have been seduced.

The council remains divided between four nations - Britain, the United States, Spain and Bulgaria - who are ready to support a new resolution that would clear the way for military action, and France, Russia, China, Germany, and Syria who are vehemently opposed to this outcome.

Between these two blocks of nations are those who have come to be known as "the fence sitters": Mexico, Chile, Angola, Guinea, Cameroon and Pakistan.

Crossing the US

All of them are non-permanent members who carry swing votes, and could still be persuaded to support either side in this debate.

NEXT STEPS IN IRAQ CRISIS

28 Feb or soon after: Blix written report to Security Council

1 Mar: Missile destruction must start

Around 7 Mar: Inspectors oral report to Security Council

10 Mar: US-UK will force UN vote on resolution

Draft resolution on Iraq: text

French proposal: text

This is not a comfortable position for any nation on the Security Council.

Many of the non-permanent members have been pleading for the permanent five to resolve their differences amongst themselves before asking the rest to make their positions known in a vote.

They all know that one false move could have serious consequences in terms of their relations with the United States.

Those who have crossed the US in the past have found out soon enough what this means in terms of the disbursement of economic aid packages, trade relations and official invitations to visit Washington.