Reluctant Congress Likely to Back Reflagging Kuwait Ships

Congress appears to be swinging from outright hostility to unenthusiastic support for President Reagan’s plan to provide naval escorts to 11 Kuwaiti oil tankers in the Persian Gulf.

“If the Congress were to reverse him, by cutting off the money or perhaps other courses of action, it would add another negative chapter to U.S. credibility in the Persian Gulf region,” said one of Reagan’s key backers, Sen. John W. Warner (R-Va.).

Aides to four top Democratic lawmakers said sentiment appeared to be shifting toward what one called “the Warner thesis”--that Reagan has made a weak case but that reversal by Congress could further cripple U.S. foreign policy.

‘No Good Options’

“We’ve got no good options,” Rep. Les Aspin (D-Wis.) said at the end of the week.

Arab diplomats, watching the debate closely, said failure to fulfill Reagan’s promise to Kuwait would undercut the American position in the region, which was badly damaged by the Iranian revolution in 1979, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the taking of U.S. hostages in Iran and Lebanon, a terrorist bombing that eventually led to the Marine withdrawal from Beirut and the secret sale of arms to non-Arab Iran for its war against Arab Iraq.

The chances that Congress will wind up endorsing Reagan’s plan, or reaching a compromise, were far from clear, Senate Majority Whip Alan Cranston (D-Calif.) said through a spokesman. And an aide to another top Democrat said that “the process of consultation could go on for weeks before this thing goes through.”

Senate Democratic Leader Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia said at the beginning of the week that Reagan’s plan is “half-baked and poorly developed,” and the Senate Republican leader, Bob Dole of Kansas, said “the Administration needs to do a better job of explaining it.”

‘Opinion Not Crystallized’

After a week of explanations, an aide to a Democratic committee chairman said that “opinion has not crystallized.” Despite misgivings, “people aren’t sure they want to jerk the rug out from under the President.”

Capitol Hill opposition to Reagan’s plan was channeled into resolutions that would either bar the reflagging altogether or invoke the War Powers Act, which requires congressional approval for putting U.S. forces in a combat area for more than 90 days.

A chief opponent of Reagan’s plan, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.), postponed until Thursday a panel vote to bar the reflagging and ask the United Nations to guard the oil lanes.

Few Swung by Speech

Reagan generated little enthusiasm for his warning, in a nationally televised speech Monday night, “that if we don’t do the job, the Soviets will.”

But in numerous hearings and meetings and a Pentagon report sent to Capitol Hill, the Administration message came through that, in the words of Frank C. Carlucci, the White House national security adviser, “We cannot afford to let hostile powers--either the Soviets or the Ayatollah (Ruhollah Khomeini)--gain a choke hold in so central a region.”

Backing away from the deal “would cause us problems” in the Arab world at a time when the United States is working across the board to curb growing Soviet influence in the region, said one White House official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Bid for Arab Support

The United States has been trying for several months to garner Arab support to limit the Soviet role in a proposed U.N. conference on tempering the Arab-Israeli conflict.

And Administration officials said they agreed to reflag the Kuwaiti vessels last spring “before all the policy pieces were in place” because the Kuwaitis had agreed to lease three Soviet tankers.