Saddam Hussein officially accepted a U.N. resolution Wednesday calling for Iraq's disarmament and the return of weapons inspectors, but the standoff between the United States and Iraq remains far from resolved, according to some experts.
Although Iraq's parliament rejected the resolution Tuesday, Hussein and his inner circle made the final decision to reluctantly accept it. The move was looked at as a positive step by many in the United Nations who want to solve the Iraqi problem without the use of force.
However, according to White House Deputy Press Secretary Scott McClellan, the United States will wait and see if Iraq's compliance is genuine.
\We have heard this before from Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi regime,"" McClellan said in a press briefing Wednesday. ""Now we need to see it by Saddam Hussein's actions.""
President Bush has called compliance with the resolution Hussein's last chance. The United States has the option of attacking if Iraq does not adhere to the resolution.
U.S. Sen. Herb Kohl, D-Wis., voted to authorize Bush to use force against Iraq. But according to Zach Goldberg, Kohl's deputy press secretary, Kohl voted for disarmament, not the wider goal of regime change and would like a peaceful resolution.
""His goal is that by putting teeth in the resolution it would force Iraq to disarm,"" Goldberg said. ""If they don't, then it's time to use force.""
While the difference between the parliament's rejection and Hussein's acceptance seems to point to a division on this issue, the reality of Baghdad politics is often wildly different from how it appears, according to UW-Madison political science Professor Michael Barnett.
""I think what we saw was allowing the parliament to express its own rage and rancor about the resolution,"" Barnett said. ""Then Saddam Hussein comes through the next day and says, 'I'm a true statesman, I'm a man of peace. ... I'm going to rise above the rancor and accept the weapons inspectors.'""
The resolution calls for Iraq to declare all of its weapons of mass destruction within 30 days, allow weapons inspectors unconditional and immediate access everywhere, let witnesses to its weapons of mass destruction program testify outside Iraq and stop shooting at coalition planes patrolling its no-fly zones.
The last detail could be particularly sticky because Iraq has been firing on planes since weapons inspections ended in 1998.
The next step in the resolution comes Dec. 8, when Iraq is required to submit a detailed account of its program to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Given Iraq's repeated denials of any such program, this could lead to trouble.
""It all depends on whether in face he proceeds to play along and how much he tries to return to his old game of cat and mouse,"" Barnett said. ""If Saddam Hussein says, 'We have no weapons of mass destruction,' then I think it'd be fair to say that the U.N. Security Council will say, 'We're not that stupid. We know you've got them, and you're in material breach.' I think that then opens up the grounds for war.\
