THE eleventh-hour deal with Saddam Hussein achieved by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan pulls the Iraq crisis back from the brink of war.

A sigh of relief will echo around the world for that.

The American and British resolve in the form of threats of air strikes against Iraq has plainly been the steel reinforcement behind this diplomatic solution by which Iraq "backs down" and allows UN weapons inspections continue without time limits.

But the deal does not deliver what America was also patently seeking - the downfall of Saddam.

Indeed, the opposite may be the case.

For the more that UN sanctions against Iraq are eased, the more secure Saddam Hussein's regime may become.

And the more will Saddam be able to posture that this diplomatic solution is his victory. Whether the world can be at ease with this outcome is uncertain.

Saddam may be restrained from building up another arsenal of weapons of mass destruction, but will he not still seek ways of achieving his despotic political ambitions as long as he prevails as leader of Iraq?

It is that question which will shape America's own response to this deal and that of Britain as its ally.

In the light of this new accord and the prospect of a majority for it in the Security Council and the UN as a whole, both, if they are unhappy with it, may find their grounds for separately maintaining the threat of military action are now undermined.

But the need for keeping up the guard against Saddam Hussein has been demonstrated by the success of the threat of military action against him.

It is the only language a tyrant understands.

And the UN must always be prepared to speak it to Saddam whenever he attempts to shirk its rules - even if America and Britain have to speak for the less resolute members.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.