'There are times when a nation has to go to war. This is not the time'

Chief weapons inspector seeks to deny Bush chance of using Iraqi report as excuse for war

Some time after dusk this evening, a light van will pull up at the New York headquarters of the United Nations to deliver a document that could determine whether the world will see peace or war in the new year. It will be Iraq's declaration on all the materials in its possession that may relate to the production of weapons of mass destruction.

Today was the deadline set under an 8 November UN resolution for Iraq to "come clean" with a declaration about the prohibited goods it may have been holding all these years. Washington, in particular, has been awaiting the Iraqi text with undisguised impatience. One copy is to be flown to New York and another to the headquarters of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna. But it will be some days before any government is given guidance on what it may contain.

Hans Blix, the head of the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, Unmovic, spelled this out in talks with the Security Council late on Friday. "This will take a little time," he warned. Partly, this is because of the volume of information. Iraq was promising thousands of pages, some of them in English but others in Arabic.

Analysis of the evidence, in Vienna and New York, will not be quick. Nor is Mr Blix showing any inclination to give anyone an early peek into the pages. He said that he would only distribute the document simultaneously to the 15 council members after a few days of analysis by his own staff. And he warned that he may screen out passages that he deems too sensitive to be aired to a wider audience, for example if they amount to a manual on building weapons of mass destruction.

The caution shown by Mr Blix reflects his anxiety, shared by many others on the Security Council, that Britain and the United States may seek immediately to use the declaration to precipitate a new crisis on Iraq, especially if it amounts to a protestation of innocence. Washington has several times said that it would reject such a claim, insisting that it has its own evidence that Iraq still seeks to produce the prohibited arms.

The Iraqi ambassador to the UN, Mohammed Aldouri, restated that "everything has been destroyed" in Iraq that had anything to do with weapons programmes. He did say, however, that there would be "new elements" in his country's declaration.

Some sense of the document should at least surface when Mr Blix gives a first briefing to the council on it before the end of this week. Its real significance may come later, when his inspectors can test what Iraq declares against what evidence they find on the ground or through interviews with Iraqi officials.

A false statement in the text will not, under the UN resolution, be enough to find Iraq in "material breach" of its obligations, which could lead to war. A falsehood must be coupled with other violations before such a step.

Fresh inspectors were expected to arrive in Baghdad today, and Mr Blix hopes to have a full complement of about 100 inspectors on the ground by Christmas. Under pressure from Washington to expand his teams still further, he plans to begin the training of new recruits in January. A first formal report by Mr Blix to the Security Council on the progress of inspections is expected towards the end of next month.

Noam Chomsky, academic

If Saddam is such a threat to the survival of civilisation, why wasn't that true a year ago? And, more dramatically, in early 1990?

Woody Allen, film director

Bush has not offered convincing reasons for going to war. So we have the troubling impression that he is persisting for personal and political reasons. Norman Schwarzkopf, former Gulf War commander

Saddam is a megalomaniac. He really doesn't care much about anything other than his place in history.

Peter Kilfoyle, Labour former defence minister

I can't see the rationale behind the British and American position. The priority ought to be sorting out the threat of terrorism.

Günter Grass, novelist

George Bush is only trying to prove something to his father by starting a second Gulf war, rather than going to see a psychiatrist.

Philip Pullman, writer

There are many terrible regimes but the only reason America cares about Iraq is because of the oil supply. And that's no reason to go to war.

Bill Keller, New York Times columnist

Bush's trickiest job will be to balance zero tolerance with patience, to hold the Security Council together, and be good and bad cop.

Alice Mahon, MP, leader of the Labour Against the War campaign

The aggressors are the US, which seem hell bent on war. My dismay is that our government seems intent on helping.

Al Gore, former US Vice-President

By shifting his focus from war against terrorism to Iraq, the President has disposed of the sympathy and solidarity compiled by America.

Tony Lloyd, Labour former foreign office minister

Saddam is not going to use weapons of mass destruction because he knows he would be faced with overwhelming retaliation.

Paul Wolfowitz, US Asst Secretary of Defense

Our goal is to achieve the disarmament of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, peacefully if possible.

Victor Bulner-Thomas, director of Royal Institute of International Affairs

War is not inevitable; otherwise we undermine the UN's credibility.

Alan Bleasdale, TV scriptwriter

I would say that there are times when a nation has to go to war. This is categorically not the time.

Carla Lane, TV scriptwriter

It seems to me that we have been promising war for so long that surely they will be prepared. Saying we are going to war surely has not been ignored.

Sir John Mortimer, writer

Bush is the leader of the Church of the Latter-Day Morons, and Blair is a twit! What about Mr Sharon, who has flouted UN orders? Why aren't we going to war with Israel?

Jilly Cooper, writer

Bush talks about weapons of mass destruction, but America's got them. It supplied a lot of those that Iraq has got. All sorts of countries are doing horrible things with these weapons.

J G Ballard, writer

If they don't find he's developed any of these sinister weapons, the impression is that the Americans are still determined to topple him. That's a different kettle of fish altogether.

Martin Bell, former broadcaster, MP

There's no proof of links between Iraq and al-Qa'ida. The Government just hasn't made the case yet. As things stand, we've no business getting involved.

Bishop Thomas Burns, Catholic bishop of the Armed Forces

When do we reach the point of last resort? I don't think we've reached it because there's an alternative or two still to be explored.

Matthew Taylor, Institute of Public Policy Research

Iraq is a terrible state that treats its people appallingly. I would love to see a change of regime but there has to be evidence of a real threat.

Bernard Jenkin, Shadow Defence Secretary

If there is a breach in the inspection and that is a clear indication Saddam Hussein is not co-operating, we are left with no option but to increase pressure on him.

Neville Nagler, Board of Deputies of British Jews

If objectives are met it could be the right thing to do, but we need safeguards. It should be done within a UN resolution and there needs to be a coalition of support.

Menzies Campbell, Lib-Dem Foreign Affairs Spokesman

Saddam will do everything in his power to obfuscate and procrastinate. It is for the inspectors to determine if there has been a sufficiently full disclosure.

Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury

We need, God knows, ways of pressurising Iraq towards justice, but the military option could be appallingly costly for them, too.