ASTANA, October 18 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said Friday, October 18, that a compromise solution on sending weapons inspectors to Iraq was looking increasingly likely after the U.S. backed away from a demand that a new U.N. resolution explicitly authorized military force against Iraq. However, the Bush administration made clear it already has the authorization it needs to attack.

"I think that the (Security) Council will approve a new resolution about strengthening the possibilities of inspectors and sending them to Iraq again with the demand that Iraq fulfills their demands," Annan said.

"If it (Iraq) continues not to report to the Security Council, then the Council can take a decision about the consequences," he told deputies in Kazakhstan's capital Astana during a 12-day tour of eastern and central Asia.

A debate is raging about "whether we need one resolution where it will be stated that if Iraq does not comply, then all necessary means will be used to resolve this question," Annan said.

Alternatively the inspectors could be allowed to return to report their findings before the Council takes a second decision, he added.

Confronting strong global opposition to a war against Iraq, the United States offered the compromise resolution aimed at winning support from France, Russia and China, who want to give Iraq a chance to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors without the threat of force.

The Security Council has been meeting in open session to discuss the Iraq issue ahead of a crucial vote on the conditions under which the UN weapons inspectors will return to Baghdad, which they left in 1998, to verify Iraqi assertions that it has no nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

The United States, backed by Britain, has been pressing for a single resolution that would trigger automatic military action if Iraq fails to allow unfettered access to suspected weapons sites.

France, largely backed by Russia, favors two resolutions, with a second vote needed to authorize military action.

Annan was speaking as a compromise over Iraq looked imminent in the deadlocked UN Security Council, with Washington about to offer a deal acceptable to council co-members France and Russia.

The deal would enable arms inspectors to start work in Iraq backed with only an implicit threat of force, diplomats said. A likely U.S. draft resolution would set in place a two-stage process, convening the Security Council before any military attack on Iraq.

But, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell again made it clear the United States was prepared to act without the Council's approval if necessary, according to Agence France-Presse (AFP).

Some diplomats saw the compromise as a victory for France, which led the opposition to the original U.S. proposal, news agencies reported.

French diplomats were reported to be pleased with the elimination of the reference to "all necessary measures" but concerned about other phrases that could trigger military action, such as a reference to Iraq being in "material breach" if it violates any U.N. resolution.

Powell spoke by telephone with his French counterpart Thursday, and officials in Paris were studying the latest U.S. offer.

In Moscow, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov welcomed the new U.S. proposal and said Powell told him it would be presented formally to the Council within days.

"The United States does not need any additional authority, even now, if we felt it was necessary to take action to defend ourselves," Powell said in New York. "The United States is now operating behind the authority given to the president by a joint resolution of the Congress."

The standoff among the five permanent, veto-wielding members dragged on for weeks behind closed doors. On Wednesday and Thursday, October 16, 17, the council held a public debate on the Iraq crisis for the first time.

More than 60 countries spoke during the debate, which was requested by the Non-Aligned Movement comprising 115 mainly developing countries pressing for a peaceful solution.

Ambassadors from Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America warned that a new war would add to the suffering of Iraqis, possibly engulf the Middle East and have dire consequences for global stability. With the exception of Britain and Israel, they refused to endorse the original U.S. demand.

However, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw made it clear Friday that Britain and the United States would be prepared to take military action against Iraq, even without a new UN resolution, if President Saddam Hussein refuses to allow arms inspections, AFP said.

"We reserve the right to act within international law in respect of the use of force, which may or may not be covered by a new resolution," Straw told the BBC.

He added: "It is entirely appropriate for America, as for us, to reserve their position if the UN does not meet its responsibilities."

Straw stressed that Britain was "completely committed to a United Nations route -- if that is successful.

"If, for example, we end up being vetoed on statements which are as plain as daylight that Iraq is in flagrant breach of UN resolutions, then of course we are in a different situation -- we don't want to be there."

Meanwhile, a U.S. source in Ankara said Friday that the commander of U.S. forces in the Gulf, who would lead any invasion of Iraq, is to hold talks on Iraq with senior Turkish military officers in Ankara next week.

General Franks, tipped by the New York Times newspaper as a possible "governor" for Iraq if U.S. forces take charge of the country after toppling Saddam Hussein, will meet with Turkish chief-of-staff general Hilmi Ozkok and other top officers on Monday.