A world divided over Saddam

Divisions over war on Iraq were fully exposed last night when Russia dashed American and British hopes of pushing a second resolution through the United Nations to provide international legitimacy for the conflict.

Igor Ivanov, Russia's Foreign Minister, warned during a visit to London that his government would not flinch from using its right of veto in the UN Security Council to avert a conflict. "Russia would not support any decision that would directly or indirectly lead to a war with Iraq," he told the BBC.

"If the situation so demands, Russia will of course use its right of veto, as an extreme measure," Mr Ivanov added before meeting Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary. Mr Ivanov dismissed talk that Russia might abstain rather than risk American wrath. "Russia will not abstain," he said. "It will take a particular position."

Russsian hostility to war had not diminshed when Tony Blair met Mr Ivanov for 50 minutes today. Downing Street said there had been a "substantial and thorough discussion" but conceded there was still disagreement between Britain and Russia.

"Yes, the Russians do come at this from a different perspective about how to deliver Iraqi compliance, but not on the need for Iraq to comply. Therefore, the discussions continue," Mr Blair's spokesman said.

With tensions rising ahead of a crucial weapons inspectors' report to the Security Council on Friday, Colin Powell, America's Secretary of State, also raised the stakes by declaring that it was prepared to launch a war with or without a second resolution.

In an interview with Channel 4 News, he said: "Saddam has had his last chance, we have to take action ... Public opinion will come round once we go ... We want to see a second resolution at the UN, but in our view 1441 is enough." Tony Blair faces political calamity if he finds himself going to war without fresh approval from the Security Council. France has already hinted that it is ready to use a veto to defeat the resolution.

For the text to pass it must attract a minimum of nine positive votes and avoid any vetoes.

But mounting pessimism over the chances of gaining those nine votes provoked speculation last night that Britain and America were preparing at the last minute to abandon a vote. That would avoid the embarrassment of defeat. But it would also imply starting hostilities without UN approval.

General Powell said President Bush believed resolution 1441 justified action and he insisted that Saddam Hussein had run out of chances to comply with the UN demand to disarm. "There is sufficient authority in 1441 and earlier resolutions if willing nations and members of the willing coalition feel it is necessary to act to protect the stability of the region to get rid of these weapons of mass destruction," he said.

America would decide early next week whether to seek a vote authorising war, the Secretary of State stressed. Washington would consult other Security Council members after the next report from Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector. "At the beginning of next week we will then make a decision ... on when we want to bring the resolution to a vote," he said.

Earlier, the White House dismissed suggestions that consideration was being given to withdrawing the draft second resolution. "Shortly after the Blix report, members will be given the opportunity to vote," Ari Fleischer, the spokesman for President Bush, said. He failed to state unequivocally, however, that retreating from a vote was not an option.

Against the backdrop of rising tensions in the UN, Mr Straw warned France and Germany they would "reap a whirlwind" if they failed to back a second resolution and forced the US to go it alone in Iraq. "Now what I say to France and Germany and all my other EU colleagues is take care because ... we will reap a whirlwind if we push the Americans into a unilateralist position in which they are the centre of this unipolar world," he said.

Souring the atmosphere further are recriminations over leaked memos showing that the US National Security Agency has been eavesdropping on Security Council members to try to find out which way each one is leaning on Iraq. Chile, which is one of those crucial undecided nations, has formally asked for an investigation into the spying, which allegedly also involved British agencies.

If the endgame is reached at the UN one way or another at the end of next week ­ with or without a vote on the resolution ­ it does not mean that hostilities will start immediately. The Pentagon is wrestling with the consequences of the Turkish parliament refusing to allow troops on to its territory, thus wrecking plans for a northern front against Iraq. That could delay a war well into April. Time would have to be given too for the evacuation of the 200-odd UN inspectors now in Iraq.

Iraq, meanwhile, continued its efforts to sway the doubters with new gestures of co-operation with Mr Blix. It destroyed more of its al-Samoud 2 missiles found to have been able to fly beyond fixed UN range limits. It has also offered fresh documents on the purported elimination of VX and mustard gas.

Senior UN sources said Mr Blix would criticise Iraq in his report on Friday for timing its co-operation with impending Security Council meetings.

Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, said the destruction by Iraq of the missiles was a "positive step".

Donald Rumsfeld, the US Defence Secretary, joined the charm offensive on British television last night, presenting a less hawkish image in an interview with David Dimbleby on the BBC. But he said he believed Iraq was capable of building weapons even with UN inspectors in the country.