Saddam's concessions come bit-by-bit

By ANDREW BUNCOMBE and KIM SENGUPTA

WASHINGTON/BAGHDAD - Today is the day for action. If Saddam Hussein has even the slimmest chance of avoiding war he must today start dismantling his outlawed Al Samoud missiles – seen by many as the crucial test of whether Iraq is serious about disarming.

The Iraqi leader indicated he will indeed be dispatching his engineers to blow-up, crush or cut into pieces the missiles whose range exceeds the 93-mile limit imposed by the UN.

The UN's chief weapon's inspector, Hans Blix, said yesterday he considered the willingness to dismantle the missiles "very significant - a real disarmament".

But even as France and Russia voiced their agreement with Dr Blix's assessment, Britain and America denounced President Saddam's offer as nothing more than another example of his attempt to fool the international community.

Speaking in Madrid where he met Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, Tony Blair referred to President Saddam's television interview with US broadcaster Dan Rather earlier this week in which the Iraqi leader suggested he might not destroy the missiles.

"The moment I heard ... that Saddam Hussein was saying he would not destroy the missiles was the moment that I knew later in the week that he would announce — just before Dr Blix reported — that he would indeed destroy these missiles," said Mr Blair.

"He never makes any concessions at all other than with the threat of force hanging over him."

He added: "This is not a time for games."

There is something of the striptease about President Saddam's destruction of the estimated 100 to 120 Al Samoud missiles, the dismantling of which Dr Blix ordered must start today.

As commentators have noted in regard to previous concessions proffered by the Iraqi leader, this one has come bit-by-bit.

Even as Iraqi officials wrote to Dr Blix, teasingly offering "in principle" to disarm, they also requested a series of technical meetings to discuss how to go about dismantling the missiles.

Those meetings are scheduled to take place this morning.

"The decision to destroy [the missiles] was unjust and did not take into consideration the scientific facts regarding the issue," President Saddam's senior scientific adviser, Lt General Amer al-Saadi, wrote to Dr Blix.

"The timing of this request seems to us to be one with political aims."

France, perhaps the most vocal opponent within the Security Council to the US and British "second resolution" that would pave the way for war, said Iraq's offer was a mark of progress and further evidence that weapons inspections were working.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said there was no reason to cut short the peaceful disarmament of Iraq.

"A second resolution today would be the first step to war. That's not what we want and that's not what today is needed. We still can work for peace," he said, pointing out that Russia – which, like France, also holds a veto at the Security Council – had similarly rejected the resolution.

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov appeared to go even further and said his country might veto the resolution if it decided that was the appropriate course.

"Russia has the right to a veto in the UN Security Council and will use it if it is necessary in the interests of international stability," he said.

It is possible that President Saddam's offer to dismantle the missiles will serve only to harden the position of those countries that have already decided upon whether or not to support the second resolution.

British officials at the UN in New York have admitted those countries seeking to defer a decision would see any Iraqi concession as evidence of the effectiveness of the inspections process.

Diplomats from countries on opposite sides of the resolution vote are desperately and aggressively seeking to persuade the six undecided members of the 15-member council who have yet to announce their positions.

Britain and America so far have the support of Spain and Bulgaria, while France, Russia, China, Syria and Germany have expressed their opposition to the resolution.

Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Mexico, Mexico and Pakistan are the six countries whose votes will be all-important for the US and Britain to achieve the nine votes – and no vetoes - they need.

- INDEPENDENT