WASHINGTON, November 12 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - U.S. President George W. Bush on Tuesday, November 12, derided the Iraqi parliament as a mere “rubber stamp” for Iraqi President Saddam Hussein after it voted to reject a U.N. ultimatum, as U.N. Chief Kofi Annan said he was still waiting for an Iraqi response.

“We’re through negotiations, there’s no more time. The man must disarm,” said Bush.

“If Saddam Hussein does not comply to the detail of the resolution, we will lead a coalition to disarm him,” Agence France-Presse (AFP) quoted Bush as saying.

The U.N. Security Council on Friday, November 8, gave the Iraqi president seven days to accept a powerfully enhanced weapons inspections regime or face “serious consequences.”

“The Iraqi parliament is nothing but a rubber stamp for Saddam Hussein. There’s no democracy. This guy’s a dictator, so we’ll have to see what he says,” Bush said as he toured a police command center here.

“The first important test for Saddam Hussein is Friday’s deadline. The choice is now up to Saddam Hussein whether he disarms peacefully or he is disarmed by force,” said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

Bush wants Iraq to relinquish any biological, chemical and nuclear programs or stockpiles peacefully but is prepared to resort to military action “swiftly and forcefully” if needed, said McClellan.

McClellan’s comments came after the Iraqi parliament voted unanimously to reject U.N. resolution 1441 but left the ultimate decision to Saddam amid signs interpreted to mean that Baghdad intends to comply.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair joined Washington in dismissing the outcome of the Iraqi vote.

“The prime minister’s reaction is that this changes nothing,” a spokesman for Blair told journalists.

“Saddam Hussein knows what he has to do. He knows when he has to do it. And he knows what will happen if he doesn’t do it.”

“The demands of the international community are absolutely clear - namely disarmament.

“The choice of how that happens is Saddam’s but that it will happen is not negotiable.”

On his part, U.N. Secretary General Annan said Tuesday he was still waiting for Iraq’s reply to a Security Council demand that it accept new conditions for disarmament, despite a negative vote by the parliament in Baghdad.

“I do not think the Iraqi parliament was talking to me,” Annan told reporters.

He noted that the Iraqi leadership has until Friday, November 15, to respond to the Council’s Resolution 1441.

“I am expecting the letter of Iraq by the 15th,” Annan said, adding that he expected Iraq to comply with the resolution, which was adopted unanimously by the Security Council and endorsed by the Arab League.

Annan’s spokesman’s office said the Iraqi government was officially notified of the resolution by fax at 10:52 and 10:55 am New York time (1552 and 1555 GMT) on November 8.

But Annan said “we have not fixed a precise time” for the reply, adding that “everybody will be satisfied if we get the letter at the end of the day” on Friday.

France, meanwhile, upped the pressure on Saddam by giving its clearest signal yet that it might support military action despite earlier opposition to the automatic use of force.

In Paris, Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin warned there will “obviously be a use of force” if Iraq fails to cooperate.

“It is up to Saddam Hussein, and Saddam Hussein alone, to meet his international obligations,” he told France Inter radio.

“At least now we can expect that any decision (to take military action) would be made unanimously,” he said, referring to the U.N. Security Council's unanimous passage last week of U.N. resolution 1441.

He added: “Now it is in the interest of his country and his people, and he must (comply) ... If Saddam Hussein does not comply, if he does not satisfy his obligations, there will obviously be a use of force.”

While warning of U.S. unilateralism and the risks of “preventive military action,” France has never ruled out joining in a military strike if it is authorized by the U.N. Security Council.

Indeed, according to Paris-based diplomats, it is unlikely France would want to cut itself out of an international coalition that would be set to dictate terms in a post-Saddam Iraq.

When asked by a parliamentary deputy if France would fight Baghdad along Washington, de Villepin responded indirectly, saying that Paris would “fully assume its responsibilities at each step of the way.”

But he noted: “This resolution gives peace a new chance, assuming that Saddam Hussein accepts the U.N. resolution without delay. The ball is now in his court.”

Asked if he believed the politics of oil played a part in Washington’s apparent determination to go to war with Iraq, de Villepin said he did not.

“You must not underestimate the shockwave that was September 11 and the feeling of insecurity the Americans have everywhere in the world.

“The security of the Americans is under threat from people like Saddam Hussein who are capable of using chemical and biological weapons.

“Let us not forget that fear is a key element in international relations,” the minister said.

Arab League chief Amr Moussa formally asked the United Nations to respect assurances it had given that its resolution “does not constitute a pretext to launch a war against Iraq nor stipulate an automatic recourse to force.”

He also repeated a request for “Arab experts to be included in the (arms) inspection teams” due to travel with chief inspector Hans Blix to Iraq.

In Brussels, NATO chief George Robertson said alliance leaders would use a summit next week to discuss possible action if Iraq fails to abide by the resolution, although a likely absentee is Germany, which has made clear it will have no part in military action.

The November 20-21 Prague summit will deliver a “strong political message” on the resolution demanding Baghdad’s full cooperation with weapons inspectors, he said.

The 250-member Iraqi parliament voted unanimously earlier Tuesday to reject the resolution, a U.S.-crafted roster of demands aimed at dismantling Baghdad’s alleged chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs and stockpiles.

But the parliament also decided to leave the last word to President Saddam Hussein.

In the clearest sign yet that Saddam may override his parliament and accept the Security Council’s ultimatum, his elder son Uday, also an MP, urged acceptance, albeit with certain provisos.

Uday, who runs an influential media empire, made clear he thought his father should accept the U.N. resolution, albeit “according to well-defined limits”.

“We have to accept the U.N. Security Council resolution which is at the centre of this emergency session,” he said in a working document submitted to MPs before their vote.

Uday called on the Arab League to provide an “umbrella” for Iraq, and demanded that Arab experts be part of the disarmament teams from the outset of their mission, a proposal backed by the League.

But he also warned that Iraq must take the initiative and launch “armed action” if diplomacy fails to resolve the disarmament impasse.

“In 1991, we were not the ones who fired the first bullet, but we waited for the first bullet to be fired by the other side, knowing the enormous sacrifices which would result,” he said.

“Now we will give time to diplomacy to achieve the conditions” required by Baghdad to agree to Resolution 1441.

“If these conditions are not achieved we have to take the initiative of rejection and of armed action against the side which intends us evil,” he warned.