Defiant Blair says UN has no veto on war

PM ignores party critics, telling Saddam to disarm or face force

An uncompromising Tony Blair said yesterday he would refuse to allow the United Nations to veto military action to rid Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction.

The Prime Minister warned the public that Saddam Hussein's weapons posed a "direct threat" to Britain but angered his Labour critics by refusing to guarantee that any war in Iraq would have to win the approval of the UN.

He told a Downing Street press conference that Britain's "preference" would be for a fresh UN resolution before an attack but added a "qualification" – that there could not be "an unreasonable or unilateral block" on a war. "We cannot be in a position where we are confined in that way," he said.

Although denying a cabinet split, his remarks contradicted those of Clare Short, the International Development Secretary, who said on Sunday that the "logic" of the Government's position was that it would not act without UN backing.

Mr Blair kept open the possibility that the United States and Britain might act in tandem if France, Russia or China, the other permanent UN Security Council members, vetoed a second resolution.

Mr Blair said, though, he believed such a scenario would not happen and expressed confidence that the international community would act against President Saddam because he had breached UN declarations.

He also appeared confident that UN weapons inspectors would uncover evidence of an Iraqi arsenal, telling reporters to ask him about their work in a few weeks' time. His remarks prompted speculation that crucial evidence from US and Britain intelligence services may provide the "smoking gun" the inspectors have yet to find.

The Prime Minister also suggested a war could be launched even if the inspectors found no evidence, on the basis that President Saddam had obstructed their work. He had "no doubt at all" that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. "So whatever happens, Saddam will be disarmed. And it is his choice as to which route is taken. It can be the peaceful route, because he can co-operate with the inspectors, or it can be through conflict," he said.

Mr Blair said 27 January, when Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, will report to the Security Council, was an "important day" but insisted no one was fixing "speculative or arbitrary timeframes". The UN inspectors said yesterday that they may need six months to complete their sweep of Iraq.

Mr Blair said it was only a matter of time before terrorist groups obtained chemical, biological or nuclear materials. He denied double standards over North Korea, saying the world would have to tackle rogue states and terrorists systematically, which he admitted could take years.

Some Labour MPs reacted angrily last night. Alan Simpson, MP for Nottingham South, warned: "If you choose to operate outside international law and you act in defiance of any democratic mandate from your own society, sooner rather than later the mandate the Prime Minister has will be withdrawn by the British people."

Charles Kennedy, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: "It is disingenuous to argue that we want to work through the UN, but only if the UN does what we want."