The essential objective of the escalating diplomatic and military pressure on Serbia's President Milosevic is to relieve the rapidly deteriorating conditions for 300,000 refugees made homeless by his rampaging troops in Kosovo and to bring him to the negotiating table to reach a political settlement on the territory's future. If that is achieved by the diplomacy which last night offered new hope of resolution, all concerned will be greatly relieved.
But there should be no mistaking the necessity to apply the threat of military action against him in order to achieve it, or, if necessary, the actual use of force. This is clearly the only language he understands. The damage he has done and the looming humanitarian catastrophe for which he is responsible outweigh reservations expressed by those who say another United Nations Security Council resolution approving the use of force by NATO is legally required. Last week's resolution called for immediate humanitarian relief, a return of refugees to their homes and a negotiation on a political settlement. It was taken under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which authorises the use of force, but did not specifically endorse it.
The arguments over whether another one is needed revolve around the possibility of a Russian or Chinese veto. They both went along with the existing resolution and the Russians have supported the intensive efforts to find a political agreement. They say they do not agree with the laying down of deadlines. But there can be no denying the imminent disaster facing hundreds of thousands of refugees, which necessitates an immediate response.
Nor should there be any doubt about the need for a properly trained and armed presence on the ground to ensure the refugees are able to return home safely. Reports that Mr Milosevic had agreed to such on-the-ground surveillance circulating among NATO diplomats last night are welcome. If true, the US negotiator, Mr Richard Holbrooke, must now assure himself that the Serbian leader - a man who has so often breached such agreements - means what he says this time. Unless such fine print is agreed at this stage any agreement would collapse, because it would be incapable of implementation if Serb troops and police are not withdrawn and remain to plant fear once more amongst the villagers.
A combination of civilian monitors acting under the auspices of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, together with NATO and other military organisations similar to those in Bosnia, is likely to be required to oversee a settlement.
All these factors underline the urgency which NATO representatives have applied to a timescale to the use of force. Mr Holbrooke continues, so far, to keep open the lines of communication with Mr Milosevic. It is very much to be hoped a satisfactory deal can be reached in time to avoid a military escalation.
And it behoves NATO and the US government to pay the most careful heed to the responsible reservations expressed by Russian and other representatives about shortcomings in the legal and diplomatic procedures involved. Given the precedents that could be set by allowing the humanitarian imperative to override considerations of state sovereignty on this occasion, it is essential that all efforts be made to keep the consensus achieved in last week's UN resolution together in coming days.