US President George W. Bush has kept tightening the screw on his Iraqi counterpart by accelerating his war deployments.

British Prime Minister Tony Blair, the sole foreign head of state standing shoulder to shoulder with Bush as he rattles the sabre, has also raised war rhetoric.

And cracks have emerged in the Arab coalition against the US threat of war as some nations softened once-strong opposition.

The world is waiting to see what is going to happen next.

As a member of the international community who signed and thereby assumed an obligation to abide by such international laws as the UN Charter, Iraq must honour its commitment by cooperating fully with arms inspectors when the latter carry out their UN-authorized duties.

This is the last chance for Saddam Hussein to deprive the Americans of a legal case against himself.

An Iraqi failure to satisfy the inspectors' requests might give Bush the excuse he craves to forcefully carry out his coveted "regime change" in Iraq.

Whatever happens, the international community - and the UN Security Council in particular - must maintain a clear head about what is to be done in its name.

Even if the Iraqi pledge of cooperation ultimately proves to be filibustering, as some Americans claim, the UN must be ware of the legal boundaries of its own authority.

To make sure its authorization is not hijacked by the interest of any individual countries, the UN Security Council has to see to it that arms inspectors know where the borderline is between national sovereignty and international concern.

Iraq earned itself the current legal obligations to live under international scrutiny through its past aggression.

Still, as a UN member, it deserves to be treated fairly and decently.

The UN, as a respected source of international justice, must prove it deserves the trust.

(China Daily September 25, 2002)