Despite the war rhetoric coming daily from Washington, Iraq is likely to be given "some time" before military action takes place. Khaled Dawoud reports from the US capital Click to view caption The United States' decision not to take its dispute with Iraq over the so-called "no-fly zones" in the northern and southern parts of the devastated nation to the United Nations Security Council was the latest indication, for observers, that US President George W Bush was likely to give Baghdad some time before resorting to military action. Before leaving for Prague on Tuesday to take part in the NATO summit, Bush reiterated his daily threats against Iraq, and said he would seek the backing of his allies for his policy. But the US president conceded that Iraq would not be the main topic at the meeting aimed mainly at approving NATO's expansion to include former Eastern European countries, and seeking backing for the US war against terrorism. If military action were needed, Bush said he would consult again with NATO members "and everybody will be able to make the decision that they're comfortable with". He added, "I hope it happens peacefully. But if it doesn't, people will know that our intent is to lead a coalition of like-minded, freedom-loving countries to disarm [Iraqi President] Saddam Hussein." Shortly after the Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 1441 on 8 November, US officials immediately declared that Iraq's continued firing at US and British airplanes monitoring the "no-fly zones", established unilaterally by the two countries in 1991, would represent a "material breach" of the resolution. With Bush's declared "zero-tolerance" policy towards Iraq, any "material breach" of that resolution would simply provide the pretext that most hard-line members in his administration are pushing for to launch war and topple the Iraqi regime. Nevertheless, Iraq has defied Washington's interpretation of the resolution, and has been firing almost daily since the beginning of this week at US and British airplanes patrolling the "no-fly zones". Feeling that even its closest allies would not consider those latest incidents -- which have been occurring regularly over the past 10 years -- as a sensible justification for starting war, US officials were quick to retract their earlier threats. Secretary of Defence Donald H Rumsfeld called Iraq's no-fly-zone firing unacceptable. But he also said on Monday, "It's up to the president (Bush) and the UN Security Council on their view of Iraq's behaviour over a period of time, and those discussions have just begun." In briefings to reporters, senior administration's officials indicated that the likelihood that a war could take place against Iraq would be reduced, at least, until the UN weapons inspectors provide their first report on their work in Iraq in late January. They added that, at the same time, Washington will be looking for a pattern of repeated Iraqi violations of the UN resolution before they would rush their case to the world body. Meanwhile, Washington will keep the "gun pointed at the head of the Iraqi regime", according to US National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, to force Baghdad to cooperate with UN weapons inspectors and get rid of all its weapons. Hardly a single day had passed after the Security Council issued its resolution two weeks ago, before leading US newspapers were running scores of stories on massive war plans, and assurances that Washington has received from several key countries in the Middle East region of their readiness to take part in the military campaign. Other stories leaked on a regular basis concern the blowing up of Iraq's alleged arsenal of biological and chemical weapons, or questioning the objectivity and ability of UN weapons inspectors to disarm Iraq. US officials concede that any military campaign against Iraq would begin with a psychological campaign intended to turn Saddam's forces against him. Rumsfeld has approved the outlines of an ambitious plan that goes beyond traditional leaflet drops and broadcasts, a senior Defence Department official said. Of course, officials added, the buildup of American forces in the region is a big psychological operation in itself. In Sunday's most popular talk shows, several key analysts and commentators said they had no doubts US Vice President Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld were behind the leaking of reports on war preparations to the press. Ever since discussions began within the US Administration in mid-August on whether to proceed with a plan suggested by Secretary of State Colin Powell to seek a new UN resolution on Iraq, Cheney was reportedly "beyond hell-bent for action against Hussein. It was as if nothing else existed", said prominent Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward in his latest book, "Bush at War". Powell, who spent hours explaining to the president the dangers of US unilateral action, emerged as the winner in what clearly seems like a deep split within Bush's cabinet. Richard Perle, a key adviser to the Pentagon and a superstar in the hardliners camp within the Bush Administration, could not even hide his frustration towards key European countries like Germany and France and accused them of losing their "moral compass" for opposing US plans to strike Iraq. Worse, the UN resolution, in Perle's view, delayed more grandiose US plans to target Iran and Syria and North Korea after Iraq. "You could not do a deal with Hitler, and you can't do a deal with Saddam Hussein or North Korea," he said. Karl Rove, Bush administration's chief political strategist, wasn't less frank. When a student asked him during a recent speech at the University of Utah if the administration was concerned over the possibility that 200,000 innocent Iraqis might die in an American-led invasion, he responded, "I'm more concerned about the 3,000 who died on 9/11." With the US administration losing the first confrontation with the international community over the no-fly zones, the upcoming deadline for renewed war talk is likely to be 8 December, when Iraq presents a comprehensive list of its entire weapons arsenal, and not just weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is also required to provide a similar list of all scientists and officers involved in arms production, and a list of all companies and countries that helped Baghdad develop its weapons programmes. Most US officials believe Saddam will not provide a comprehensive list, and that he will almost certainly hide key information. That, officials said, would be a major "material breach" that could justify going to war. But until that "material breach" happens, the world is likely to be kept on the edge of its seat watching the US military buildup, and listening to daily war threats coming from Washington. Related stories: Inspections begin The bike shop's door Whither Arab independence? No spying this time A pretext for war? 14 - 20 November 2002 Related links: United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) UN Security Council (UNSC) United Nations (UN) The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
