America works on 'Middle Six' in effort to shift Council waverers off the fence

A week ago, Britain, Spain and the United States presented the Security Council with a resolution tersely detailing the failure of Iraq to disarm, thereby opening the path to war. But in those seven days, the mathematics for the text's passage have not become any kinder.

Maybe nothing can move until Friday, when Hans Blix, the senior weapons monitor, will brief the Council again on the progress of his inspections in Iraq. This weekend will be the moment when the so-called Middle Six in the council will decide on which side of the fence they intend to sit.

The weekend will also be the time when Washington and London will begin seriously to consider whether passage of the resolution is likely, or simply doomed. If they reach the conclusion that the latter is the case, they may conclude they would do better not to ask for a vote on the text at all.

Progress has not been helped by news of spying by the United States on other Council members ­ through electronic eavesdropping by the National Security Council ­ to try to get an early guess on which way the undecided states are leaning. At least one member, Chile, is said to be angry and has asked the British Government to investigate the truth of the report and offer an explanation.

This spying scandal is critical precisely because Chile is among the swing voters of the Middle Six. The others are Angola, Mexico, Pakistan, Guinea and Cameroon. Pakistan is thought to be edging towards support for the resolution, but it too has been peeved by news that Uncle Sam has been cheating.

"One realises high politics is something that Girl Scouts and Boy Scouts don't engage in," a Pakistani source said. "But for Pakistan, given the level of intelligence sharing with the United States that's going on right now, it means they don't trust what we say behind closed doors. It will not be appreciated."

The first task for Washington is to line up the nine votes that will be needed for the resolution to pass. Already on side are its two other sponsors ­ Britain and Spain ­ as well as Bulgaria. Firmly opposed are China, France, Germany and Russia. America needs five of the six waverers to win passage.

But that is just stage one. Assuming they can get those missing votes ­ and diplomats in Washington appear marginally more optimistic about this than their counterparts in London ­ they must then deal with the risk that the resolution might yet be shot down by a veto from China, Russia or France.

Igor Ivanov, Russia's Foreign Minister, hinted in London yesterday that his government might be willing to do exactly that, though Western diplomats still hold out the hope that Moscow would not dare risk its ties with America in such a way. France remains the country most likely to use its right of veto.

The White House yesterday dampened speculation that President George Bush had already concluded that passage of the resolution was unattainable. Members of the Security Council will get "the opportunity to vote", the President's spokesman, Ari Fleischer, told reporters.

Colin Powell, his Secretary of State, said yesterday America would not start any action until after the weapons inspectors reported to the Security Council, though a second resolution was "preferred". But the very notion of Britain and America simply abandoning the quest for a second resolution was already sending diplomatic tremors around the world. That would imply that Washington had determined finally to give up on the UN and go to war with Iraq with any countries ready to join the military effort. That would mean Britain. But without UN cover, Tony Blair would be confronting a political crisis more critical than any he has experienced before.