THE UNITED Nations is once again on the brink of conflict with Iraq, but the worry is: what else are we on the brink of?

The blunt message being relayed to Baghdad is that the time for talking is over; either Iraq allows back the UN inspectors looking for weapons of mass destruction or it will be hit by air strikes.

But while Saddam Hussein seems determined to invite such action a disquieting question remains over what the action will achieve.

Will it destroy Iraq's deadly arsenal?

It is far from certain that it would all be wiped out.

Will it bring about Saddam Hussein's own downfall?

Bombs and missiles falling on Baghdad have failed to overthrow him in the past and his rule of terror has repressed opposition groups which might oust him.

Yet if the UN has little option than to punish Saddam if he will not parley and relinquish the evil weapons of which he is so fond, it needs to be asked what he hopes to gain.

For isolated though he may be at present, the possible consequence of Iraq emerging from the conflict with Saddam not only still in place but strengthened in Middle Eastern eyes as the Arab leader who is prepared to stand up to foreign interference and pressure -- particular that coming from the West -- is not a prospect to be welcomed.

For the effect of anti-American and, so, anti-Israeli, sentiment in the Middle East being gathered around and led by an aggressive, bullying Iraqi regime is one upshot of its bombing raids for which the UN may have to be prepared.

There is no question that bad and dangerous Saddam needs to be toppled for the safety of the Middle East and the good of his own people.

But how it is to be achieved is a far more difficult question -- and the consequences of failure even more so.

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