UNITED NATIONS – After heavy criticism of his inaction in the face of atrocities in Sudan’s Darfur region, Secretary-General Annan yesterday put his weight behind an American sponsored resolution on Sudan and announced he was sending his adviser on genocide to the region.

Mr. Annan’s announcement was designed to highlight the Darfur atrocities but was overshadowed by a remark he made to the BBC last night that the American-led war in Iraq was illegal.

The statement, which came five days before a major speech by President Bush to the United Nations, made political waves here and in Washington yesterday and was criticized by some as interference in the American election. Mr. Annan’s own aides seemed to backtrack as well.

“He has not asked me to be his adviser on matters of public relations,” American U.N. Ambassador John Danforth told The New York Sun when asked about Mr. Annan’s BBC interview.

“If I had been his adviser, which I wasn’t, I would have advised him not to say it at all. And if he was going to say it at all not to say it now.”

Mr. Danforth spoke just before closed-door consultations in the council on the American-sponsored resolution which calls for beefing up the African Union presence in Sudan, threatens sanctions on Sudan’s petroleum industry, and calls on Mr. Annan to establish a commission of inquiry to determine whether genocide has been committed there.

In his remarks yesterday, Mr. Annan said he was going to send the high commissioner for human rights, Louise Arbour, and his special adviser on prevention of genocide, Juan Mendes, to Darfur, “not to describe or characterize what is happening, but to see what more can be done to stop it and prevent further abuses.”

Nevertheless, the move was described by aides as “moving the ball” on the issue of genocide, after both Congress and Secretary of State Powell had used that word to describe the Darfur atrocities. Mr. Annan noted that the council has for the first time invoked the article on genocide, which carries mandatory punitive action against its perpetrators.

Mr. Annan also urged the council to pass the resolution quickly. “No matter how the crimes that are being committed against civilians are characterized or legally defined,” he said, “it is urgent to take action now.”

Mr. Danforth cited a report by the World Health Organization that determined that 10,000 people die in Darfur’s camps every month, calling for a vote tomorrow.

Sudan’s U.N. ambassador, Elfatih Mohamed Ahmed Erwa, was indignant when asked about the accusations of genocide.

“Nobody has said this except the Congress and Powell,” he told the Sun. “You should ask them what do you call what is happening in Fallujah today.”

He was alluding to resentment against America at the U.N. regarding the war in Iraq, which Mr. Bush may address when he comes here next week for the opening of the General Assembly debate. That sentiment was behind Mr. Annan’s BBC interview on Wednesday, according to several diplomats.

Mr. Bush yesterday expressed no regrets, however. “Knowing what I know today even though we haven’t found the stockpiles of weapons we thought were there, I’d still make the same decision,” he said at a campaign stop in Minnesota.

Others accused Mr. Annan of election interference. “I think it is outrageous for the secretary-general, who ultimately works for the member states, to try and supplant his judgment for the judgment of the member states,” Randy Scheunemann, a former advisor to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, told the Sun’s Jamie Dettmer. “To do this 51 days before an American election reeks of political interference.”

America’s coalition partners, such as Australia’s prime minister, a spokesman for Prime Minister Blair, and the Japanese government, argued that 16 council resolutions against Iraq, and especially resolution 1441, which determined Iraq was in noncompliance and that further measures should be taken against it, supplied the legal justification.

“It seems to me that it would undercut the rule of law had there been no action,” Mr. Danforth told the Sun.

Mr. Annan’s aides argued that the remarks were induced by the BBC interviewers “for political reasons,” as one of them told the Sun. Spokesman Fred Eckhard listed a number of previous statements by Mr. Annan in which he had said the war was in contradiction with the U.N. charter. He added that member states knew of that position.

“We see nothing new in it,” he said.