A 17-point communique issued at the end of a three-hour session on the Balkan conflict meant different things to different countries. The most hawkish among the countries -- United States and Britain -- aggressively pursued their agenda of military escalation to bring Yugoslavia to heel.But in deference to several smaller countries which are not enthusiastic about this line, the communique left room for a compromise by Nato short of what Washington and London want.

For instance, the communique said the allied forces are prepared to suspend air strikes once Yugoslavia has begun -- instead of finished -- withdrawing troops from Kosovo. It also did not insist that Belgrade withdraw all troops.The concessions were apparently made at the behest of Italy and Greece, two countries withmost reservations against the hard-line US-UK stand.

But US officials almost immediately began trashing the concessions, expressing doubts about whether there could be a settlement even with the toned-down Nato position.

In fact, even as the communique was begin drafted, Pentagon was already lining up additional forces to be sent to Albania, troops which could end up as an invasion force.

Smaller Nato countries also fought to include a clause that enjoined the alliance to seek a UN security council mandate to send an international peacekeeping force -- and not necessarily a Nato -- led one -- at Kosovo once hostilities have ceased. But the US said it is committed to sending an international military force to Kosovo whether the Security Council endorses it or not.

Differences between the US-UK position and that of other smaller countries were evident throughout the day, which consisted mostly of sombre meetings instead of the celebratory gala the summit was meant to be. Most fundamentally, the alliancedisagreed on whether the Nato bombing campaign was the solution or the problem now.

The air raids have not led to the end of ethnic cleansing, but rather have intensified it, Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis said, adding that the bombing campaign, now a month old, had enabled President Milosevic to strengthen his position.

The countries were also riven over the bombing the Serbian media, an act which Italian foreign minister Lamberto Dini said was unauthorised and described as terrible news. But Washington and London showed no compunction about it and indicated more such attacks aimed at destroying Milosevic's propaganda machine.

The alliance however agreed to impose an oil embargo against the Serbs and enforce it by stopping and searching ships in the Adriatic, a move that may aggravate the war.

At the end of the day, however, it became clear that the conflict was poised to escalate after word came from Belgrade that Yugoslavia had rejected the presence of international troops in Kosovo, belyingearlier reports to that effect. Belgrade clarified that President Milosevic had only agreed to unarmed peacekeepers in Kosovo during his meeting with Russian peacemaker envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin.

Yugoslav foreign minister Zivadin Jovonavic was quoted as saying the presence of an armed peacekeeping force would be in contradiction with Yugoslavia's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and should Nato invade Kosovo, Vietnam would be nothing compared to what the US was getting into.The US-UK combine was no less belligerent in Washington. In fact, the 17-point Nato communique resounded with phrases like Nato is determined to prevail, and it will resolve to see this challenge through. At a formal state department dinner later in the night, US Defence Secretary William Cohen said Nato had the power to determine a new destiny.