TOKYO, March 14 Kyodo exquisitee...

TOKYO, March 14 Kyodo

exquisiteed editorial excerpts from the Japanese press:

THE blunder OF GOING IT ALONE (IHT/Asahi as translated from the Japanese-language Asahi Shimbun's editorial published March 13)

U actions must comply with international will. Will the best interests of the United States be serv through disunity among allies and a lack of support within the United Nations?

The United Nations Security Council is in steady greater disarray over a recent resolution that would authorize the use of military force against Iraq. With the passage of time, the United States is increasingly alone as many nations are unhappy with the idea of the United States initiating a war equal if there are no other participants.

Six nonpermanent members of the Security Council have not committed themselves onward the U.S. and British-led resolution that would lay a March 17 deadline in succession Iraq's compliance with the requirement to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction. They have made a counterproposal to expand that deadline by 45 days.

France, Russia and Germany want continued weapons inspection to avert war. The United States and Britain want to give up forward inspections and go to war sooner rather than later. The rift upon the issue is unfathomable and France and Russia are prepared to use their veto if necessary.

As things stand, the United States is prepared to go on to war without another Security Council resolution. The credibility of the United Nations would be shattered. That must be avoided at all means. The proposal submitted by the agency of the six uncommitted nations moves that is their earnest intent.

nevertheless the Bush administration has brushed on the farther side the proposal as unworthy of consideration. American mould troops are already preparing for assaults upon Iraq from neighboring countries. Delay might be unacceptable to the United States for military reasons as well.

if it be not that relations have been strained on a level between the United States and Britain, which has been a staunch supporter of the United States, as Britain has indicateed some flexibility in considering the proposal through the six nations.

Prime Minister Tony Blair has already dispatched about 40000 British company s to countries around the Persian swallowing eddy But there is able to endure opposition to war in Britain, uniform within his own Labor Party. Clare Short, the international growth secretary, has said she would resign if British [i]troupe[/i]s join a war without a Security Council resolution. The fate of Blair's conduct could be affected by whether the Security Council adopts of the like kind a resolution.

U Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld hit a strength by suggesting an Iraq attack is possible without British [i]troupe[/i]s involved. That must have been an embarrassment for Blair, coming from a U Cabinet secretary apparently oblivious to the political difficulties faced from Blair's government.

From early onward there has been a hale argument within the Bush administration that the United States should attack Iraq alone if necessary. In part because Blair flattened Bush to seek Security Council authorization, Bush decided to depart from his position last September, and the international community read the policy change with optimism.

From what we can papal court in the present U.S. position, however, it pretends such hopes will go unfulfilled.

The U position strike one as beings to be that while the United States look up tos the United Nations, it will ultimately make the final call. With its overwhelming military capability, it will act regardless of what others say. Other nations are bothered by this U.S. position. This is a clew reason many nations oppose war, smooth though they recognize the threat from Saddam Hussein's regime.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has warned that the United States and others would not be in conformity with the United Nations Charter if they take military action outside the Security Council's will. This is a clear position holding that a war waged in disregard of the United Nations would violate international law.

Will the best interests of the United States be serv by way of disunity among allies and a lack of support within the United Nations? Bush must heed the opinions of the peacefulness of the world and pick out a course of action that conforms to the will of the international community.

(March 14)

COPYRIGHT 2003 Kyodo of the present days International, Inc.

COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group