According to recent reports, the U.S. government urged U.N. investigators to stop a series of surprise weapons inspections in Iraq. The move was an attempt to prevent another stalemate with Saddam Hussein. Is America changing its policy towards Iraq? Following a background report, four foreign policy experts debate the situation.

ELIZABETH FARNSWORTH: The Iraq story begins with this backgrounder by Spencer Michels.

SPENCER MICHELS: The latest standoff came last week when high-level meetings in Baghdad ended abruptly. They had been called to discuss U.N. inspections of Iraq's chemical and biological facilities and missile programs. At those meetings, the director of the U.N. Commission on

Richard Butler, U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector

Iraq, Richard Butler, said he laid out a road map for concluding the inspections. But Butler's proposal was immediately rejected by Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz. He demanded an end to both the inspections and economic sanctions by the U.S. and some other nations, which have been in place since Iraq invaded Kuwait eight years ago. Aziz angrily blamed the United States of pushing the U.N.'s Special Commission on Iraq, or UNSCOM, to serve American interests.

TARIQ AZIZ: UNSCOM is back to its old games, to its old tricks, games of confusing the major issues and the minor issues, since this is the wish of the American administration, to perpetuate the situation, to prolong the current situation, to keep the sanctions on the people of Iraq. As long as this is the American wish, you are serving the American policy.

SPENCER MICHELS: Butler and the inspectors promptly left Baghdad. In an interview on the NewsHour, Butler explained why:

RICHARD BUTLER: Quite simply, after a day of talking with Mr. Aziz and his team, where we had intended to have two days, he made a demand of me in the evening, where he said, look, you must go back to the Security Council and say we are disarmed; missile, chemical, biological, the lot, go tell them that truth. If you don't, you'll have it on your conscience, he said, and that's my demand. I said, well, I can't do what you've asked me to do, because you see, I don't have a magic wand. I can't just wave it over these weapons. I can't do disarmament by declaration. I have to do it on the basis of evidence.

SPENCER MICHELS: The last time Iraq kept U.N. inspectors out--in January--the United States responded by reinforcing its military presence in the Gulf, but the Security Council was divided over the use of force. And so in February, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan personally intervened to broker a deal with the Iraqis allowing inspections to start up again. In the deal, put in the form of a U.N. resolution, Iraq agreed to give immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to arms inspectors. The resolution also promised "the severest consequences for Iraq" if it reneged. Commenting on the resolution, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said, "If Iraq interferes with the inspectors, we will act firmly and forcefully and without delay." Ever since then, the United Nations--not the United States--has taken the lead in negotiations with Iraq.

Yesterday, Annan sent a special envoy to Baghdad to say the U.N. still expects Iraq to abide by the February agreement. Meanwhile, there have been no new inspections in Iraq since August 5th, although some monitoring of sites has continued by the U.N. The Washington Post today reported that Secretary of State Albright strongly urged Butler not to undertake two surprise inspections earlier this month. But Albright disputed that report and said the United States will continue to rely on the United Nations to persuade Iraq to allow inspectors to resume their work.

MADELEINE ALBRIGHT, Secretary of State: In the meantime we're not going to play Saddam's game on his terms. He wants to create a U.S./Iraq confrontation. This is an issue between Iraq and the United Nations. But let me also make clear that, if necessary, we will use force on our timetable in response to threats at a time and place of our choosing.