Voting in the UN Security Council on a new resolution authorising war against Iraq is not now expected until the first week in March, pushing the timetable for a White House decision on military conflict until towards the middle of next month.
The likely new timetable has emerged as the Taoiseach, Mr Ahern, described a second UN resolution on Iraq as "a political imperative" for any military action. He explicitly disputed the Bush Administration's earlier view that another Security Council vote is not necessary.
After lengthy internal debate in the Bush administration, however, the US is now fully committed to seeking support for a resolution, which White House spokesman Mr Ari Fleischer said would enforce Resolution 1441. It would give Iraqi President Saddam Hussein a final choice "that if Iraq didn't comply and disarm there would be serious consequences", he said, and that "they have had their final chance".
The British ambassador to the UN, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, said he expected debate on the text to extend past March 1st, the day when chief weapons inspector Dr Hans Blix makes a further report on inspections in Iraq.
A US diplomat said no vote was foreseen until after the next report by Dr Blix. March 1st is a Saturday and a UN spokesman said an oral presentation may be made to the council by Dr Blix and his colleague Dr Mohamed ElBaradei on Friday February 28th or Monday March 3rd.
The new resolution will be drafted jointly by the US and Britain and would contain a deadline for Iraq to show it is actively co-operating, the British ambassador said. Even with an ultimatum of only a few days, this would delay military action until mid-March.
Mr Fleischer said "the President intends to work with our friends and allies to offer a resolution either this week or next at the United Nations Security Council, and the President has made repeatedly clear that the preferable outcome is for the United Nations to act."
In an open debate at the Security Council yesterday and on Tuesday, the vast majority of more than 50 countries making presentations voiced opposition to war. Only Australia and Japan supported the US though Peru and Argentina mentioned the possible use of force if Iraq does not comply with Resolution 1441.
The British Foreign Office yesterday told UK nationals to leave Iraq immediately because of "increasing tension in the region and the risk of terrorist action".
Mr Ahern yesterday gave his most robust and open explanation yet of the rationale behind the Government's position after another day of Opposition criticism over his refusal to rule out supporting unilateral US action.
In the Dáil, at his parliamentary party meeting and in media interviews Mr Ahern pointed to the level of US investment in Ireland and the political access the Government had to the White House as factors influencing Government policy on Iraq. "These are facts and considerations," he told the Dáil.
However in a direct challenge to the American position he said the US should now drop its argument that a second resolution was unnecessary.
" Whether legally you need one or you don't, we believe it's a political imperative in this situation that we have one and that's where we stand," he said in an RTÉ interview.
He said the most important goal was the maintenance of the authority of the UN Security Council and warned of the consequences of the erosion of that authority. "Because what happens in the next crisis and the one after that? What happens in crises in 10 or 20 years? You have to have an international order to deal with crises."
He said he accepted that the 100,000 people who marched against war last Saturday had not been demonstrating in support of Government policy. "Of course they weren't. . .They were supporting the position of being anti-war. If everybody was to reflect on it they would see the sense of my argument."