On a day of destruction, the Allied leaders discuss reconstruction - and reinforcements

On the seventh day of the Iraq war, the two leaders of the Allied coalition met to talk of destruction and reconstruction. It was hard to tell which was uppermost in their minds.

Tony Blair flew across the Atlantic to confer with George Bush at Camp David, knowing that US missiles had earlier slammed into a poor residential area of Baghdad, killing at least 15 people, according to eyewitness estimates, wounding many more, provoking incandescent fury among the Iraqis and providing the sort of harrowing pictures of civilian casualties the Allies have been desperate to avoid.

Mr Blair also took with him the grim knowledge that despite such terrible images, current levels of bombing and battering may not be enough to secure victory and that even more brute force may have to be authorised to overcome Saddam Hussein. The Americans are already talking of reinforcements, and the US Army announced yesterday it would deploy its hi-tech 4th Infantry Division to the Gulf to join the war, with the first troops likely to leave today. A first detachment of about 1000 US paratroopers also landed in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq, possibly heralding the opening of a northern front.

Yet, as Prime Minister met President in the Marylandretreat of Camp David, Mr Blair was keen to make Mr Bush focus on the post-war settlement and rebuilding of Iraq, and to persuade him of the need for the United Nations to take a substantial role, not least so that the war-fractured relationship between the Anglo-Saxon world and Europe could to some degree be repaired.

Whether Mr Bush would agree to the latter proposition seemed a moot point. On his Air Force One flight to Florida to address US troops yesterday morning, before the meeting with Mr Blair, the regular "stuffed French toast" item on his breakfast menu had been replaced with "stuffed freedom toast". Take that, Frenchies.

But the encounter between two of the world's most powerful men was principally about something else ­ the dilemma at the heart of a liberal imperialist war, the need to talk of destroying and rebuilding in almost the same breath. That was as clearly visible at Camp David as it was in Iraq itself.

In central Iraq, the destruction was continuing at a furious rate as US forces battled on towards Baghdad, while at the same moment in the south, the initial steps to rebuild a broken country were being taken, with the arrival of the first aid shipments at the newly secured port of Umm Qasr.

Seven large and battered tractor-trailers emerged from a sandstorm and drove into the town, having crossed the desert from Kuwait with a cargo of food and water. As the trucks lumbered past blasted buildings on the border, an Iraqi boy about 10 years old pointed to his mouth and shouted "Eat, eat!" When the convoy arrived, Iraqi youths cheered and swarmed around British troops as they handed out yellow meal packets and bottles of water.

Later, the Royal Fleet Auxiliary ship Sir Galahad was expected to dock in Umm Qasr with more than 230 tonnes of supplies, including 110 tonnes of water, 18 tonnes of rice, 20 tonnes of lentils and five tonnes of milk, after the 47-mile long channel from the Gulf had been cleared of Iraqi mines.

All the supplies are badly needed in Basra, where aid agencies are warning of an impending disaster. Red Cross workers managed in part to restore the water supply yesterday as they strove to avert a crisis for up to two million people trapped in the city.

Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, said he would meet the heads of all UN humanitarian agencies to discuss Iraq. Iraqis have about five weeks of food left, according to estimates by the World Food Program (WFP).

The agency said Iraq would probably need the biggest aid operation yet to feed its 24 million population for six months ­ once the war is over. "We are envisioning an enormous programme, probably the biggest humanitarian operation in history," a spokesman said.

The WFP will make the biggest single request for cash in its history ­ more than $1bn (£630m) to help to feed the country for about six months.

But it was destruction that was making more headlines yesterday, as two off-target missiles brought death to one of Baghdad's commercial and residential districts ­ mainly occupied by Shia Muslims who are potential enemies of the Sunni Muslim Saddam clique. Not so likely after this.

Allied commanders wavered about their responsibility, saying at first that they had targeted an Iraqi missile site very close to civilian housing, then backtracking and suggesting ­ none too convincingly ­ that the Iraqis may have either blown up the market themselves or fallen victim to their own anti-aircraft fire. Nobody in Baghdad believed a word of it, fully expecting the missiles to be a prelude to an all-out attack.

The leading American unit, the 3rd Infantry Division, was, however, still a good way short of the city ­ perhaps 50 miles ­ despite US insistence that the war was going according to plan. "We are one tank of fuel from Baghdad," said one commander.

The Americans appeared to be encountering sporadic but sometimes fierce resistance all along their hugely stretched 200-mile line of communication. A rocket attack near Nasiriya wounded 30 US Marines last night, even as the Americans vowed to go into "hunting mode" to clear pockets of opposition.

In the south, British forces found themselves in sporadic combat against Iraqi militiamen outside the second city of Basra, still waiting for the internal uprising of citizens which they thought they had detected on Tuesday night. The initial hopes of a revolt to equal the Basra citizens' rising after the 1991 Gulf War remained unfulfilled.

Tony Blair told the House of Commons that "some limited form of uprising" had occurred in the city but that, having risen up twice before against 20 years of "brutal repression" without support, the people of Iraq were "naturally wary".

Last night, events in Basra began to heat up when a convoy of between 70 and 120 Iraqi tanks and armoured personnel carriers was seen moving south-east out of the city, apparently using the continuing sandstorms as cover to make their getaway. They were immediately spotted by coalition radar and attacked by warplanes and artillery.

In the Kurdish-controlled north of the country, just before the US paratroopers landed, Allied jets pounded frontline Iraqi positions near the town of Chamchamal, which lies 20 miles east of the important oil city of Kirkuk, which has also been bombed in recent days. Kirkuk itself is in territory controlled by President Saddam.

The military situation for much of yesterday was confused, and not only because dense spring sandstorms were blanketing Iraq. Baghdad resembled smoggy London in the 1950s. It was covered in a dense yellow-brown haze, which meant streetlights had to be switched on in the middle of the day (and may have led to the civilian missile casualties).

Confusion also arose because reports from some of the hundreds of journalists on the ground, "embedded" with the fighting units, were not being quickly confirmed from the coalition's Central Command headquarters in the Gulf state of Qatar. Reporters with the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force quoted intelligence officers as saying that 3,000 Republican Guard troops were heading from Baghdad south-east to Kut on Highway 7. Another 2,000 Iraqi troops were spotted south of Kut, and a further 1000 Republican Guard troops were said to be on their way to Najaf. But none of these reports could be confirmed by Central Command.

President Bush told US troops that the "day of reckoning" was approaching for Baghdad's leaders, but added that the conflict was "far from over".

Addressing hundreds of cheering soldiers and their families in a hangar at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, the home of US Central Command, which is overseeing the war, he said that Republican Guard units were under "direct and intense" attack and that, after a week of ground and air assaults, President Saddam was losing his grip on power.

"We cannot know the duration of this war, but we are prepared for the battle ahead," he said, announcing that 48 nations had now joined the coalition against President Saddam.

Mr Bush's speech provided a sharp contrast with Mr Blair's own update on the war to the House of Commons three hours earlier. Where Mr Blair was serious, concerned and resolute ­ but measured ­ Mr Bush was grandstanding, openly nationalistic and emotional ­ he rolled off a list of conquering generals for applause, and choked back tears when he said how proud he was to be the Commander-in-Chief. He also sported a shiny Stars-and-Stripes lapel badge, clearlyvisible against the dark cloth of his suit.

The image of Tony Blair standing at the dispatch box of the House of Commons with a small Union flag pinned to his lapel is unthinkable. Nevertheless, Mr Blair also sought to address his own country's concerns, saying that the whole House would wish to join him "in sending deepest sympathy and condolences to the families and friends of those who have died and praise them for their courage in giving their lives in the service of their country".

Later, Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, paid tribute to two British soldiers killed by "friendly fire" during a night-time battle in southern Iraq. Corporal Stephen Allbutt, 35, and 19-year-old Trooper David Clarke ­ both members of the Queen's Royal Lancers ­ died when their Challenger 2 tank was hit by a British tank round near Basra. Their deaths bring the total number of British fatalities during the war to 20, two in combat and 18 in accidents or by "friendly fire".

The first British wounded arrived home for treatment yesterday on a VC-10 military flight to Stansted airport, Essex, from Kuwait via Cyprus. Three battle casualties were on board but the Ministry of Defence refused to comment on the extent of their injuries, their condition or whether they were members of the Army, RAF or Royal Navy. Two were taken to Broomfield Hospital, in Chelmsford, Essex, and one to Princess Alexandra Hospital in Harlow.

There was more concern for British casualties yesterday when the Arabic satellite television network al-Jazeera broadcast footage of what it said was two dead British soldiers and two British prisoners of war. The soldiers were said to have been killed and captured in fighting around the town of Zubayr, and the channel showed pictures of two bodies lying in a dusty road near a Land Rover; one appeared to have been shot in the stomach. Two British soldiers are still missing after their Land Rover was ambushed on Sunday by Iraqi forces with a rocket-propelled grenade in Zubayr, 15 miles outside Basra. There was no immediate indication if the soldiers in the footage were these men.

The channel also broadcast footage of what it said were two Allied soldiers who had been taken prisoner. Al-Jazeera described them as British, but later said it was unclear and they could have been American.

In a bizarre twist, there were reports that a man taken prisoner by British troops while fighting for the Iraqis was a British citizen. The army was investigating claims last night that the man in his twenties, captured during an attack on British forces near Basra, was from Manchester. According to the report, the man, who is Iraqi-born but has British citizenship, told his captors that he travelled to Iraq to fight against the coalition forces, but now wanted to return home to England to be reunited with his family.

As the fighting gets closer to Baghdad, the fear that a desperate President Saddam may use chemical or biological weapons is growing. It was given added force yesterday when 3,000 chemical warfare suits were found at Nasiriyah hospital, which Iraqi forces were using as a command post.

In addition to the suits, US Marines found 200 weapons, Iraqi military uniforms and a nerve-gas antidote injector. "What we found at the hospital reinforces our concern," said Brigadier General Vincent Brooks. "We are well-prepared to deal with the potential use of chemical weapons."

Iain Duncan Smith, the Tory leader, raised the issue in the Commons with Mr Blair. It was essential to make clear to every Iraqi commander that if they used chemical or biological weapons, it would be a war crime, he said. "Obeying orders would be no defence and anyone guilty of such a crime would be prosecuted."

Mr Blair replied: "Yes, I think it is very important to do that and we are making it very clear to Iraqi commanders in the field that if there is any question of them using chemical or biological weapons they will be prosecuted with the utmost severity and they will deserve to be so." It was something that, "from the very outset", the coalition forces had been prepared for.

Perhaps the issue will not arise. Mr Hoon told the House: "The [Iraqi] regime must know its days are now numbered."