The way we were

FACING UP TO IRAQ
Washington Post, Monday, January 29, 2001

OF ALL THE booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerous -- or more urgent -- than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade's efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction.

That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf: intelligence photos that show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons; reports of massive illegal Iraqi exports of oil through Syria; a stream of planes landing at Baghdad airport in violation of sanctions, carrying passengers from France, Russia, Turkey and Italy, in addition to Arab states; Turkey and even Britain signaling that they may no longer be willing to support U.S. air operations over Iraq. And, in case there is any doubt about Saddam Hussein's intentions, he recently presided over a bellicose military parade in Baghdad featuring 1,000 tanks and scores of mobile missile systems.

The Clintonites had one clear reason for trying to ignore this worsening threat: It is hard to know what to do. Efforts to tighten sanctions on Iraq in the U.N. Security Council, or even to maintain the ones that exist, are blocked by France, Russia and China, which are eager to do business with Iraq. Arab states -- and in particular the wobbly new leaders of Syria and Jordan -- have no interest in supporting a U.S. effort to crack down on Baghdad. On the contrary, Arabs throughout the Middle East are angry at the United States for its perceived support for Israel during recent clashes with the Palestinians, and that mood is likely to grow still uglier in the months ahead. The Iraqi opposition remains weak and divided; even its latest, modest plan to mount clandestine aid and propaganda operations inside Iraq, reluctantly funded by the outgoing Clinton administration to satisfy a congressional mandate, seems like a reach.

In this light, the two-word prescription for Iraq that Secretary of State Colin Powell has so far repeated -- "reinvigorate sanctions" -- is more ambitious than it sounds, while the hugely aggressive plan endorsed two years ago by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and his likely deputy, Paul Wolfowitz, which involved recognizing an alternative Iraqi government and providing it military cover to set up a headquarters in southern Iraq, sounds just as ambitious as it is. Both ideas would require radical reversals by unhappy allies such as Turkey and Jordan, and Secretary Powell would have to win over non-allies such as Syria and Russia too. Other options are more plausible but far weaker: The United Nations is due to resume talks with Iraq next month and could try to broker a deal that would end sanctions in return for Iraq's acceptance of new weapons inspections; some Europeans are suggesting a refocusing of sanctions on essentials, such as controlling Iraqi oil exports and stopping the import of militarily useful materials.

In all this, the option the Bush administration can least afford is Mr. Clinton's inaction. Saddam Hussein -- who tried to assassinate Mr. Bush's father after losing the Persian Gulf War to him -- is likely to challenge the administration soon; among other things, Iraq has been laying the groundwork for an attempt to disrupt world oil markets by withholding its production as OPEC tightens supplies. To be sure, it will take considerable time and effort to roll back Saddam Hussein's gains. But in the short term, some steps can be taken. Pressure can be focused on Syria, as well as on Turkey and Jordan, to stop the illegal export of Iraqi oil. And the administration can take a clear stand: If new Iraqi production facilities for weapons of mass destruction can be identified, the United States quickly will take action against them -- with or without its allies.

CLINTON -- U.S. WILL STAY WITH IRAQ POLICY

(Following is an editorial, broadcast by the Voice of America January 26, reflecting the views of the U.S. government.)

The new administration of President Bill Clinton has made it clear in both words and deeds that it will continue to insist that Iraq comply with U.N. Security Council resolutions. The day after President Clinton took office, an Iraqi missile battery used its radar in a hostile manner to track American planes patrolling the "no-fly" zone in northern Iraq. In accordance with previously established rules of engagement, the American planes attacked the Iraqi missile site. A similar incident took place the next day.

President Clinton stressed that United States policy on Iraq will not change. "It is the American policy," he said, "and that is what we are going to stay with."

Secretary of State Warren Christopher also stressed the continuity of U.S. policy toward Iraq. "The United States intends to protect our pilots in the 'no-fly' zone," he said. "The Iraqis know perfectly well what it takes to comply with the U.N. resolutions and with the establishment of the 'no-fly' zones." Secretary Christopher said the U.S. attack on the missile site shows the determination with which the Clinton administration will pursue its policy toward Iraq.

The United States and other members of the international coalition have established "no-fly" zones in both northern and southern Iraq to protect coalition pilots helping to monitor Iraqi compliance with U.N. Security 1ouncil Resolution 688. This resolution demands that Iraq cease immediately its repression of the Iraqi people. Earlier this month, after repeated Iraqi violations of the "no-fly" zones, officials of the United States, Britain, France and Russia issued a formal warning to Iraq. When the warning was ignored, coalition forces took military action. The coalition members have made it clear that further actions will depend on the Iraqi regime's behavior.

As President Clinton said in his inaugural address on January 20, America "will not shrink from the challenges" it faces in a changing world but will work with its friends and allies to shape change. President Clinton said that when America's "vital interests are challenged, or the will and conscience of the international community is defied, we will act -- with peaceful diplomacy whenever possible, with force when necessary."

More here.