E-MAIL THIS LINK
To: 

UN Update: U.S. Nixes 45-Day Extension
From Fox News, with contripbutions from the AP; posted as a followup to this article from earlier today.
The United States flatly rejected Tuesday a proposal by six undecided Security Council nations that the March 17 deadline for Iraq to comply with U.N. disarmament demands be extended for 45 days.
So they can be extended another 45 days, and another, and another . . . .
Cameroon Ambassador Martin Belinga-Eboutou announced early Tuesday that he and five other ambassadors from key council nations — Mexico, Chile, Angola, Guinea and Pakistan — would suggest the 45-day deadline extension — along with the addition of benchmarks that Saddam Hussein would have to meet to avoid war. But a U.S. official discounted the proposal. "It's not going anywhere; there's only one resolution on the table," the official said.
I've gotta put the phone down, and do what we gotta do.
But, in the face of almost certain defeat in the Security Council, and with France and Russia threatening to veto a new resolution, the U.S. and Britain signaled they would agree to a short extension of the March 17 deadline. White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the U.S.-backed resolution would be put to a vote this week and indicated a readiness to compromise. But he said the proposal to push back the March 17 deadline by a month or more was "a non-starter."
We've got to get inside there, before they kill some more.
"There is room for diplomacy here," Fleischer said. "Not much room and not much time."
Time is runnin' out Let's roll.
Both the United States and Britain, which is under intense pressure at home to get U.N. backing for any military action, said they were willing to negotiate both the deadline and other changes to the resolution. "We are busting a gut to see if we can get greater consensus in the council," Britain's U.N. Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock said late Monday. "We are examining whether a list of tests of Iraqi compliance would be a useful thing for the council. It doesn't mean there are any conclusions."
In the New York Times, this is called a "unilateral rush to war."
Greenstock said Tuesday the March 17 deadline could be extended, but not by that much. Britain is "prepared to look at time lines and tests together, but I'm pretty sure we're talking about action in March. Don't look beyond March," he said... Reacting to the possible British compromise, French diplomats said the resolution would still mean authorizing war, which France is unwilling to do.
"It would mess up our TotalFinaElf contracts."
However, the French Foreign Ministry in Paris indicated it was open to a really large bribe new ideas. "It's a new development and the future will tell us if it is a significant development," said Foreign Ministry spokesman Francois Rivasseau. "We've indicated we are open to dialogue." Nonetheless, he stressed that the "red line" set out by France cannot be crossed: "We want no ultimatum. We want no element of automaticity.
We want our oil contracts. And ice cream. And a pony for our birthday.
And we've said we want what the inspectors say taken into account."

Russia's U.N. Ambassador Sergey Lavrov agreed. "We see no reason whatsoever to interrupt the inspections, and any resolution which contains ultimatums and which contains automaticity for the use of force will cost you money is not acceptable to us," he said.

While Washington and London worked on a possible compromise, council members agreed to hold another open meeting on the Iraq crisis at the request of the Non-Aligned Movement, which represents about 115 mainly developing countries. Most are thuggish dictatorships like Saddam's opposed to a war against Iraq. Diplomats said that would likely delay a vote until Thursday at the earliest. The open meeting will give nations from all parts of the world a chance to voice their views on an issue that has polarized the Security Council. It will also give supporters and opponents of the U.S.-backed resolution more time to lobby.

President Bush, meanwhile, was conducting an urgent phone campaign, seeking support from world leaders. Chinese President Jiang Zemin told Bush that inspections in Iraq should continue and the standoff should be settled without military action, the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday. Jiang told Bush there was "no need for any new resolution," said spokesman Kong Quan.
"Hear that, guys? The Chinese said we don't need another reolution. If 1441's good enough for them, it's good enough for me! Let's roll."

In the Axis of Weasels anti-war camp, French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin had traveled to Africa to bribe meet with the leaders of Angola, Guinea and Cameroon — three important swing votes on the Security Council. Japan has begun lobbying the undecided council members to urge support for the U.S.-backed resolution, the Japanese Foreign Ministry said Tuesday.
Thanks!
In one call, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi told Mexican President Vicente Fox that international divisions were putting the United Nations' authority at stake, the ministry said. "Mexico is taking an independent position and is not leaning to either side," Fox said.

The current draft resolution — which authorizes war anytime after March 17 unless Iraq proves before then that it has disarmed — requires nine "yes" votes. Approval also requires that France, Russia and China withhold their vetoes — either by abstaining or voting in favor. The United States is assured the support of Britain, Spain and Bulgaria, with Cameroon and Mexico believed leaning toward the U.S. position. But with Germany, Syria and Pakistan preparing abstentions or "no" votes, Washington is left trying to canvass the support of Chile, Angola and Guinea.
Like Neil Young said,
Time is runnin' out
Let's roll.
Posted by: Mike 2003-03-11
http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=11181