The resolution, authorising a multinational force in Iraq, is to be discussed at an emergency meeting of foreign ministers from the five permanent Security Council members in Geneva Saturday.

"I think there is much which is left to be desired in the text," Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha told AFP.

"There is nothing today to change the position that we had taken in July... there is no explicit UN resolution," he added.

India on July 14 rejected a US request to send 15,000 to 20,000 troops to Iraq but said it would reconsider if there were an explicit UN mandate.

France, Germany and Russia have submitted amendments to the US draft which would limit the US's political role in exchange for their support to bring order and stability to Baghdad.

Sinha made it clear that no "final decision" had yet been taken by the Indian government on whether it would send troops to Iraq under a UN mandate, as was claimed by the Indian media Friday.

Most major newspapers, quoting top government sources, said the Indian government had ruled out sending troops to Iraq even under a UN mandate notably because of domestic political implications.

The reports said the line New Delhi is now pushing is that it cannot spare any of its million-strong army for peacekeeping operations due to security threats within the country and on its borders.

However, the real reason, the reports said, was that national elections are due in India by October 2004 and the ruling Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) believes it would be politically disastrous if any Indian soldier died in Iraq.

Sinha declined to comment on the media reports.

A senior Indian government source told AFP Friday however that it was "unlikely" India would reverse its July decision.

WAR.WIRE