UNITED NATIONS, AUG. 6 -- The U.N. Security Council's 13 to 0 vote today for sanctions against Iraq is the most sweeping call for economic action against any countries the world body has ever approved in its 45-year history.

The 159 member nations were asked to halt trade, financial dealings and transportation links with Iraq and Kuwait in an effort to force withdrawal of Iraq from its neighboring state. The only items exempted from the boycott were medical supplies and food "in strictly humanitarian circumstances."

Under the U.N. charter, the resolution is binding on all members. U.N. sources cautioned, however, that the boycott will not be effective unless members are willing to implement over a sustained period the resolution's ban on arms shipments to Iraq, trade activity -- including the purchase of Iraqi and Kuwaiti oil -- and payments and loans to the two countries.

Since Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait on Thursday, the small nation has been ruled by a government installed by Iraq. The U.N. sanctions, as well as those already adopted by the United States, the European Community and many other nations, have been applied to Kuwait as well as Iraq to prevent Iraq from reaping economic benefits from its conquest.

Of particular importance, the sources added, will be whether Turkey and Saudi Arabia will use the resolution as a basis for shutting down Iraqi oil pipelines that extend through the two countries to the Mediterranean and Red seas. Iraq relies heavily on oil exports for income.

{Turkish President Turgut Ozal, in an interview with ABC News, had indicated that Turkey would close down the pipeline completely once the Security Council adopted the sanctions resolution.}

"The council has passed a significant and important test," U.S. Ambassador Thomas R. Pickering said after the vote. "The countries of the world now face a test as to whether and how they will rapidly apply this resolution. Obviously we expect and hope they will pass this test."

{In Washington, President Bush praised the council's decision and called for "full and total implementation of these sanctions, ruling out nothing at all."}

U.N. officials said it will be two to four weeks before the embargo's effectiveness can be gauged. The resolution instructed U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar to collect information about whether the sanctions are being implemented and to report back to the council within 30 days.

Iraqi Ambassador Abdul Anbari, charging that his country is defending Third World interests against U.S. "imperialism," vowed that his government would not give in to pressure.

"This resolution doesn't help Iraqi troops to withdraw," he said. "Quite the contrary. This resolution exacerbates the crisis and impedes troop withdrawal."

Iraq was unable to muster much support in the day-long council debate. Of the 15 Security Council members, two -- Cuba, an implacable foe of the United States, and Yemen, unwilling to take sides in a dispute between two fellow Arab states -- abstained.

The rest of the council, including the five permament members with the power to veto a resolution, voted for the embargo.

Sir Crispin Tickell, Britain's U.N. ambassador, characterized the circumstances that led the Soviet Union and China to vote with the West as an example of "the new U.N., not the Cold War U.N."

Sources here said there was little doubt that the Soviet Union would support the resolution since Moscow already had banned arms shipments to Iraq and had joined the United States in a joint denunciation of the invasion. That was in marked contrast to the situation in 1979, when the Soviets vetoed U.S. efforts to have the Security Council vote sanctions against Iran for taking American diplomats hostage in Tehran.

The sources said that backers of the resolution were concerned primarily about China, which had shown some hesitation about bringing the resolution to a vote. In the end, however, China withheld its veto and voted for the embargo.

The Security Council acted after Iraq ignored its call last week for an immediate and unconditional withdrawal from Kuwait. Its action today was taken under provisions of the U.N. Charter allowing members to deal with breaches of international peace through "steps not involving the use of armed force."

Only twice in the past has the United Nations taken similar actions, imposing a series of trade embargoes on Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, between 1966 and 1977 and an arms embargo on South Africa that has been in effect since 1977.

Today's far more sweeping action bars U.N. members from importing, directly or indirectly, all commodities and products originating in Iraq and Kuwait, using vessels flying the flag of either nation to transport any commodities, including arms, or making available to them "any financial or economic resources."

Mohammad Abulhassan, the U.N. ambassador of Kuwait's deposed rulers, the Sabah family, said after the vote that "if there is no compliance by Iraq, the Security Council must consider other measures such as military action." But sources here cautioned that the members seem determined to try all nonmilitary options first. The United States, the Soviet Union, China, Britain, France, Canada, Colombia, the Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, Finland, Malaysia, Zaire and Romania voted for the resolution.