But on the eve of Tony Blair’s arrival in Moscow, Russian officials suggested for the first time that President Vladimir Putin could be open to the possibility of a new UN Security Council resolution, if there was no automatic trigger for military action and Russia’s economic interests were taken fully into account. But he also made clear Russia harboured deep suspicion of Washington’s motives. “We have no evidence that the goal of a war against Iraq is not to destabilise the international oil market,” he said.Before the talks today and tomorrow, Mr Blair insisted the objections to a new UN resolution could be overcome, saying both countries had a common interest in removing chemical, biological and “potentially nuclear” weapons from Iraq. Mr Yastrzhemsky said Russia’s position on Iraq could not be detached from its economic interests there.

He warned that Russia’s social stability could be jeopardised by a sharp fall in oil prices. Moscow’s interests in Iraq include oil concessions which Russia wanted to develop and machine-building contracts, under which Baghdad owed Russia between $8bn and $10bn.Mr Blair admitted Russia had “concerns of a commercial and financial nature” over Iraq, but added: “I think the main preoccupation of Russia … has been to make sure that whatever takes place, takes place with the fullest support of the international community, and that’s our concern as well.”He told the BBC World Service there was “no truth” in suggestions that Britain could turn a blind eye to Russian conduct in Chechnya in return for Moscow’s support for US and British-led action in Iraq. But he added: “People should never forget Russia itself has been the victim of terrorism – terrorism coming from extremists operating out of Chechnya – and that the territorial integrity of Russia should be respected.”In Tehran, Jack Straw was told that the focus by Washington and London on a possible war on Saddam Hussein had meant neglect of the Israel-Palestinian problem, and led to a “deep hatred” of America. Iran rejected the Foreign Secretary’s attempts to seek support for a tough UN resolution..

Thirteen years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Europe took its biggest and boldest gamble yesterday, paving the way for the former Communist countries of eastern Europe to join the EU in little more than a year. If it succeeds, the European Union will have fulfilled its self-appointed mission to bring together the peoples of Europe.If it fails, as it might, the achievements of the existing EU – including the single market – could be destroyed.A more likely danger is that the 25-nation EU will become incapable of taking decisions and that a hard core of states, based on membership of the euro, will emerge as a union within the Union, from which Britain might yet be excluded.The gambit should turn the EU, with 400 million people, into by far the largest political and economic player in the developed world. The cruel and arbitrary division imposed on Europe more than 50 years ago by war and ideology would be healed at last. By 2004 the new EU is expected to stretch from the Irish Sea to the Baltic coast and taking in territories that once fell under the iron fist of Communist dictators such as Stalin and Ceausescu.The European Commission believed that it had no choice but to go for this mass enlargement. Any further delay in accepting countries that have already been waiting for democratic and economic recognition for 12 years might be disastrous.Although EU heads of government still have to haggle over the finance before providing an official rubber stamp, the deal is practically done. Only another “no” next week in the Irish referendum on the Nice Treaty, which outlines changes needed to accommodate 10 more member states, can derail a move of historic proportions.But neither the western European countries nor the eastern ones can really claim to be ready.The existing 15 have yet to show the political will or imagination to take the decisions needed to allow a maxi-EU to operate sensibly on a day-to-day basis, let alone move forward.

There is little true statesmanship in any European capital – not in Berlin, not in Paris, not in London – to match the enormity of the task ahead.The club of six, forged in the hope of preventing France and Germany from ever going to war again, will be expanded from its current 15 countries to 25. The members include eight former Communist countries – Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia – plus the islands of Cyprus and Malta. Two economic and political laggards, Romania and Bulgaria, are officially in the ante-chamber.Yesterday in Brussels the EU leaders oscillated between exuberance and concern at the implications of a political leap in the dark. Now, he told the European Parliament, “we have rediscovered a historic unity between all our peoples. Our common destiny is to build our future together.”The candidate countries are still suffering from the economic and political consequences of having been severed from the rest of Europe for so long.Problems there certainly are. The EU has managed three expansions before – from six to nine to 12 and finally 15 – but never anything on this scale.