The true ratio is more like four to one.There were 1,019 cases in Britain last year, compared with 274 in France.The explosion of the disease in France, gloomily forecast three years ago, has not happened. One butcher in Paris who used to sell Scottish beef, said: "The embargo may be lifted but I don't see there being any demand. I won't have it in my shop.If you have a single label saying British beef, the shoppers will think it's all British beef and go elsewhere.". The Bush administration made official its new philosophy of America yesterday: it is a country that reserves the right to act pre-emptively against a potential foe, brooks no military rival and regards most non-proliferation treaties as barely worth the paper they are printed on. It could be seen in dismissive attitudes to non-proliferation and arms control treaties, in the "pre-emption" doctrine set out at the President's West Point speech in June and in the campaign to topple Saddam Hussein.But the document, "The National Security Strategy of the United States", which the White House has just sent to Congress, pulls together the strands as never before.It reveals how the attacks of 11 September last year have conclusively laid to rest the thinking that dominated the post-war Cold War era.No less striking is its language, straight forward to the point of bluntness. Mr Bush, according to The New York Times, told his staff the document "had to be written in plain English 'because the boys in Lubbock ought to be able to understand it'."Deterrence in its old sense of "Mutual Assured Destruction", is out – "there is no way in this changed world to deter those who hate the United States and everything for which it stands," says the document. America "is now threatened less by conquering states than by failing ones".

The US would not hesitate to act "alone if necessary" to exercise its right to self-defence.In the war against terrorism, Washington now vows "to convince or compel" states to accept their sovereign responsibilities – an argument used by the Bush administration in the case of Iraq.Nor should too much faith be placed in non-proliferation treaties. The new buzzword is "counterproliferation" – a concept embracing everything from missile defence programmes and military strikes to taking out threatening weapons facilities. To have a free hand to fulfil its aims, America will not permit "any foreign power to catch up with the huge lead the US has opened up since the fall of the Soviet Union" in 1991.The document also says America will continue to use the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to spread its free-market doctrines.. Russia and the United States failed to resolve differences yesterday on what is emerging as the central issue in the Iraq crisis – US insistence that United Nations weapons inspectors cannot return until the UN has passed a stern new resolution spelling out the consequences if Baghdad fails to co-operate. The formulation indicates that, in contrast to the US, Russia does not believe a new resolution is required after Saddam Hussein's about-face on Monday on readmitting the inspectors.Mr Bush's meeting with Mr Ivanov, accompanied by Sergei Ivanov, the Defence Minister, was a main element of the US diplomatic offensive to win support for a new resolution.

Russia, with its veto powers on the Security Council and economic ties with Baghdad, represents the biggest single obstacle in the way of that goal.White House officials were optimistic afterwards that Russian readiness to keep talking was a sign that Moscow could be flexible. Before meeting the defence and foreign ministers, Mr Bush spoke by phone to President Vladimir Putin, pressing his arguments and, some suspect, offering promises on a post-Saddam Iraq that could win over Moscow..If agreement is not reached, Washington will play tough. In a thinly veiled threat, the Secretary of State, Colin Powell – regarded as the spokesman of the moderates within the Bush administration – bluntly told a congressional committee that America would prevent the inspectors' return unless they were armed with a resolution spelling out the consequences if Iraq did not grant them full and unfettered access to all sites.This reflects irritation in the White House at the speed with which Kofi Annan, the UN secretary general, accepted President Saddam's promise to readmit the inspectors without condition. Without intense additional diplomatic and military pressure, America believes, the Iraqi dictator will prevaricate.As it is, Hans Blix, head of Unmovic, the UN weapons monitoring body that replaced Unscom, said this week that inspectors could be back on the ground in Iraq by 15 October. This would start a phased inspection timetable, including a few early requests for access designed to test President Saddam's willingness to let them work freely.For all George Bush's threats to act unilaterally if necessary, he is acutely aware that to block the inspections would play very badly, not only abroad, but also at home and on Capitol Hill, where Mr Bush is seeking explicit endorsement of the use of force if Iraq does not make good on its existing broken promises to the UN.Thus the importance of Russia. If Moscow can be won around, or at the minimum induced to abstain, the draft resolution Britain and America want to present to the 15-nation Security Council early next week would probably pass, before Mr Blix's inspectors start work.But Russia for the moment remains adamant. According to the Kremlin, Mr Putin again told Mr Bush that the priority was to secure the fastest possible deployment of UN inspection and monitoring missions.

The disagreement is the greatest test yet of the new rapprochement between the former Cold War superpower adversaries which grew closer after 11 September.Speculation of a behind-the-scenes bargain is rife. US officials deny they are ready to turn a blind eye if Mr Putin moves his forces into neighbouring Georgia, said by Moscow to be harbouring Chechen insurgents, if Russia acquiesces in a US led-strike. Mr Bush was said by his spokesman yesterday to have told the Russian President that Georgia's territorial integrity and sovereignty must be respected. Another possible carrot is an assurance that Russia will be allowed its share of the economic windfall, especially in the oil sector, for foreign interests in a post-Saddam Iraq, and that it will be compensated for debts owed by the ousted regime.As London and Washington stepped up pressure on the Security Council, Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's UN ambassador, met representatives of the 10 non-permanent members, whose votes could be vital, to impress on them the need for a new resolution.Merely to avoid a veto by Russia, America and Britain need nine votes in favour if a resolution is to pass. This means as many as seven non-permanent members might have to be persuaded.As the diplomatic jockeying continued, the Pentagon continued its military preparations.