Iraq’s Position in War Eroding, U.S. Believes : Resolve Is Questioned; Iranian Victory Would Be ‘Catastrophic’ for America, Official Says

The Reagan Administration is growing increasingly concerned that Iraq, its will to fight eroded by more than five years of battlefield stalemate, ultimately may lose its war with Iran, a result that officials believe would be catastrophic to U.S. interests in the Middle East.

“There is concern about Iraqi resolve and about the position of (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein,” a senior State Department official said Tuesday. “I think the Iranians, certainly under (the Ayatollah Ruhollah) Khomeini, have a greater staying power.”

The official, who requested anonymity, said U.S. intelligence agencies do not believe that Iraq faces imminent collapse. But there is concern, he said, that an Iranian victory could clear the way for the Khomeini regime to become far more dangerous even than Col. Moammar Kadafi’s Libya. Iran, he explained, is much larger and potentially much stronger.

When the Iran-Iraq war broke out in September, 1980, most American officials agreed with a quip attributed to former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger: “It’s a shame they both can’t lose.”

Objective No Secret

But, more recently, Washington has concluded that far more danger is posed by Iran, which has made no secret of its ultimate objective: a total defeat of Iraq that would leave the Baghdad government controlled by Iranian forces, either directly or through pro-Iranian Iraqis.

“I think the impact (of an Iranian conquest) would be catastrophic in terms of U.S. interests in the (Persian) gulf,” the State Department official said. “If Iran could force an Iraqi government dictated by Iran, the whole political alignment around the gulf could shift entirely.”

Although the war has affected the oil industries in both Iran and Iraq, both countries have continued to produce and sell petroleum. The recent sharp drop in oil prices will put an economic squeeze on both war efforts.

The U.S. official said an Iranian victory would almost certainly destabilize oil producers Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, which have provided substantial amounts of economic aid to Iraq, and would give “impetus to Islamic fundamentalism throughout the Islamic world.”

Frederick W. Axelgard, a Middle East expert at Georgetown University’s Center for Strategic and International Studies, was even more apocalyptic: “It puts at risk almost every interest the United States has in the Near East.”

He said that if Iran disposed of Iraq, it could be expected to put pressure on Jordan, Israel, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. An Iranian victory also would strengthen the hand of pro-Iranian Shia Muslim extremists in Lebanon.

The concern of U.S. officials, which is understood to be shared by Turkey and possibly other allied governments, stems more from the potential consequences of an Iranian victory than from conditions on the battlefield. The officials believe that the Iraqis can hold out for some time, although the trend seems to be running against them.

One U.S. official said Iraqi troops made “a poor showing on the battlefield” in the fight for the Faw Peninsula in southern Iraq. Iranian troops swarmed across the vital Shatt al Arab waterway, Iraq’s only link to the sea, in February, took the peninsula and occupied large areas of Iraqi territory. Iraq has been unable to dislodge them.

“The Iraqis don’t seem to have the will to risk the kind of casualties that would be needed to get Faw back,” the official said. “Saddam Hussein has about total air superiority if he wanted to use it. He has a large advantage in armor and in artillery firepower. But he is not willing to send in the infantry.”

Other U.S. and allied officials agreed that Iran has seized the initiative with a strategy that relies on hand-to-hand combat.

U.S. government figures, which officials admit may not be wholly accurate, show Iraq has suffered an estimated 400,000 killed and wounded in the conflict, a daunting casualty toll for a country of 14 million. Iran’s losses are undoubtedly higher, but battlefield statistics from that country, with which Washington has no diplomatic relations, are even harder to obtain.

U.S. analysts believe that Iraqi attempts to minimize casualties will result only in a drawn-out war of attrition that will produce more casualties in the long run. Besides, Iran, with a population of 42 million, is in a better position to benefit from a stalemate.

The senior State Department official said a continuing stalemate “might lead to increasing discontent in the military with the leadership of Saddam Hussein.”

He said it is impossible to predict the consequences of the overthrow of Hussein, a primary goal declared by Iran. But the official said no one in the U.S. government believes that the Tehran regime would call off the war if Hussein should fall.