Washington has moved to settle the argument between the US and other members of UN Security council over the new international war crimes court.
The US has threatened to withdraw its involvement in all UN peacekeeping missions if it cannot secure immunity for its forces from the court.
There has been no immediate reaction to the move from the 14 other members of the UN Security Council, who overwhelmingly support the International Criminal Court which officially came into existence on Monday in The Hague.
America's proposal would give the council more power to decide whether peacekeepers could be prosecuted in specific cases. And it would allow the five permanent members - the US, Britain, France, Russia and China - to use their vetoes to block permanently the court's investigation or prosecution of peacekeepers.
Britain holds the presidency of the council this month, and last night hosted an informal meeting to discuss the US proposal. But there was little enthusiasm, with diplomats saying it would still undermine the concept of the court.
Mr Richard Dicker, director of the International Justice Programme at Human Rights Watch, said the US proposal would give immunity to troops from countries which are not parties to the Rome treaty that established the court.
"This would be a blatant amendment of the treaty," he said. "It is wholly and completely unacceptable."
US President George W Bush said yesterday he would not back down, but would try to reach a compromise. He fears his troops could be subject to frivolous or political prosecutions.
The court is intended to tackle war crimes committed anywhere in the world.
The US decision to oppose it throws into question the future of peacekeeping missions like the one in Bosnia, which came up for review this week.
AP