In a closed session on Feb. 24, the United States and Britain, with the support of Spain, proposed a new resolution to the United Nations in regards to dealing with Iraq’s seemingly apparent refusal to disarm. Although it does not explicitly outline military action against Iraq, the proposal paves the way for martial engagements to take place. The resolution, despite being the appropriate diplomatic gesture, is a lost cause.

For the United States to get this resolution passed, nine of 15 voting members must approve the measure. Not only that, but the resolution must also avoid being vetoed by any one of the five permanent members of the council: United States, Britain, France, Russia and China. Out of the five, the only two currently in favor of immediate action against the Iraqi regime are Britain and the United States.

France, Russia and China all favor continued inspections. France, however, is not even worried about having to use its veto power. According to CNN, France’s foreign minister said the veto was “not an issue” because of strong opposition among voting members.

The only true hope for the United States is the report from weapons inspectors on March 7. Recent discovery of Al Samoud-2 missiles provide clear and concise evidence that Iraq has indeed been violating U.N. Resolution 687 — the 1991 resolution that forbade Iraq from possessing weapons of mass destruction. These missiles exceed the 150-kilometer range that Resolution 687 set. Chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has ordered these missiles to be destroyed by March 1, a date likely set strategically so that Blix could report on Iraq’s compliance/noncompliance.

However, if Blix reports that Saddam Hussein and Iraq comply, the U.S./Britain resolution may be more defunct than it currently seems. This is a serious problem for the Bush administration, which needs the support of other countries to gain approval in the international community, especially countries that seem to be more at risk for attack by Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Without the support of allies, Americans also tend to be less in favor of the looming war. If Bush cannot garner national support, he certainly has no hopes in gaining world support. On Feb. 21 Gallup News Service reported that the percentage of Americans who favor war regardless of a new U.N. vote has dropped 9 points, down to 30 percent. Only roughly one-third of the country supports Bush to make this decision on his own.

Monday’s new resolution is an attempt to gain international support, a proper diplomatic effort when it seemed that the federal government was ready to brush aside diplomatic endeavors. Still, its timing is poor and will likely not muster the votes needed to pass in the United Nations. The proposal should have been made after inspections reports, when it will be evident whether or not Hussein has fully complied with the current demands of U.N. inspectors.

Editorial Board: Cavan Reagan, Amber Billings, Ayrel Clark, Charlie Weaver, Katie List