Iraq Attack Lacks Support

France is the latest country to warn the U.S. to exercise restraint with Iraq, while an Iraqi official says the U.S. knows an attempt to topple Saddam Hussein won't work.

Even with Congress in recess the prospect of a U.S. attack is raising questions and doubts. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, said "the administration should not expect to commit American troops to war with a wink and a nod to Congress."

"There should be a full debate and a vote," he said. "That is what the Constitution prescribes, and that is what the American people expect."

Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said nothing short of formal approval of an attack on Iraq would be acceptable.

"The Constitution says that Congress has the sole power to declare war," Feingold said. Not doing so, he said, "is an affront to Congress and to the American people."

The Bush administration takes the position it needs nothing beyond the consent Congress gave for the 1990-1991 war on Iraq to liberate Kuwait. But President Bush's advisers have concluded that it would be prudent to seek some sort of expression of support from lawmakers if the president decides on military action.

Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan said Friday Washington knows it would not be able to bring down Iraqi President Saddam Hussein the same way it toppled Afghanistan's ruling Taliban.

"We don't want to compare the two; Iraq is not Afghanistan," Ramadan told reporters in Beirut in response to a question on a possible Iraqi government-in-exile along the lines of the interim Afghan government that followed the Taliban. "I believe that the U.S. administration is convinced of that."

Iraqi opposition sources said on Thursday they were planning to meet in September to elect a government backed by the United States, which has vowed to bring down the Iraqi president rather than let him get weapons of mass destruction.

"And this talk about the Iraqi opposition is insignificant, something that doesn't merit a reply. It doesn't exist, and has no roots on the ground in Iraq," Ramadan said.

French President Jacques Chirac insisted Thursday that any military action against Iraq be decided by the U.N. Security Council, joining the chorus of leaders urging Washington to exercise restraint in its plans against Baghdad.

Chirac, in a speech to French ambassadors in Paris, called the possibility of unilateral U.S. action "worrying", and said it would be contrary to "the cooperation of states, the respect of law and the authority of the Security Council."

Without another resolution, most U.N. Security Council diplomats argue that existing measures do not provide a legal basis for a "regime change" — the Bush administration's euphemism for overthrowing Saddam Hussein on allegations of rebuilding weapons of mass destruction.

Russia, which like France has veto power in the 15-nation council, made its position clear again on Thursday.

"Russia strongly believes in political and diplomatic means to solve any issue on the U.N. agenda and this fully relates to the Iraqi issue," Moscow's U.N. Ambassador Sergei Lavrov told reporters.

China too opposes military action. And in Britain, whose position is closest to the United States, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said he would consider a report by a parliamentary committee to propose a U.N. deadline to readmit the weapons inspectors.

The arms experts left Iraq in December 1998 on the eve of a U.S.-British bombing raid and have not been allowed to return.

Unclear yet among Europeans, is whether calls for U.N. approval are a way to dissuade Washington from military action or to get political cover for eventually backing a U.S. war.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's assertion that a U.S. strike would win international support has already triggered negative reactions from Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two strategically important nations should the U.S. take on Baghdad.

Vice President Dick Cheney, speaking to Korean War veterans in San Antonio, Texas, Thursday, repeated charges from Monday that the Iraqi leader posed a "mortal danger" to the United States.

"The elected leaders of the country have a responsibility to consider all available options and we are doing so," he said. "We must not simply look away, hope for the best and leave the matter for some future administration to resolve."

Cheney said weapons inspections, interrupted four years ago, could not guarantee Iraqi compliance with U.N. disarmament resolutions.

Ordinary Iraqis went about business as usual, seeming to accept whatever comes with fatalistic calm.

"We are not scared any more by American bombs," said one Baghdad shopkeeper. "If they start bombing, let them do so."

The Iraqi government said Thursday that it was ready to negotiate.

"There's still room for diplomatic solutions to avert a war with the United States," said Ramadan, who met with Syrian officials in Damascus to raise support for Iraq's position.

"We take the American threats seriously as we know the (U.S.) administration is mad and criminal," Ramadan said.

Pakistani leader Pervez Musharraf, a vital U.S. ally in its war on terror, said Washington would not have the broad backing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld forecast this week if it launched a strike against Baghdad.

"This would have very negative repercussions around the Islamic world," Musharraf told BBC Radio.

"Muslims are feeling that they are on the receiving end everywhere. So there is a feeling of alienation in the Muslim world and ... this will lead to further alienation," he said.

Muslims around the world believe they were the main casualty of Washington's war on terror amid rising anti-Islamic sentiment and a perceived Western bias against their faith.

Many say issues close to their heart, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and protecting civilians in war, have received short shrift while Washington ploughed ahead with its agenda to rout alleged terrorists across the globe.