Reagan Blasts Efforts to Curtail Gulf Escorts : Accuses Senate Democrats of Aiding Iran With ‘Disastrous’ Legislation, Warns He Will Veto It

President Reagan on Friday accused Senate Democrats of aiding Iran and undermining U.S. interests by pushing legislation that threatens to cut off funds needed to escort Kuwaiti oil tankers flying the U.S. flag in the Persian Gulf.

Using harsh words such as “disastrous” and “ill-conceived” to describe the Democratic measure, Reagan vowed to veto the legislation if--as expected--it is approved by Congress. But he added that the Democrats already have damaged U.S. interests by proposing it.

Reagan’s stern remarks foreshadowed a full-fledged constitutional showdown between the White House and Congress over the proper roles of these two branches of government in authorizing the commitment of U.S. forces in dangerous situations.

The measure, which is similar to the controversial War Powers Resolution, requires the President to provide Congress with a report within 30 days after enactment explaining his policy of escorting Kuwaiti tankers through the gulf. After 90 days, funding for the program would be halted unless Congress votes otherwise.

Veto Threatened Earlier

The Senate is expected to vote on the measure sometime next week--either as a free-standing bill or as an amendment to a $303-billion defense spending bill for fiscal 1988. Reagan previously has threatened to veto the defense bill for other reasons.

The President, in a statement issued by the White House, said that he opposes the measure because it would “force a retreat from the Persian Gulf by the United States.

“This ill-conceived legislation could have disastrous effects for the U.S. commitment to the Persian Gulf and to our strategic interests in keeping those waters safe for navigation,” he said. “Ultimately, it could provide a means for Iran to achieve what cannot be achieved by any other means: namely, our complete withdrawal from the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.”

Earlier in the day, White House spokesman Marlin Fitzwater also accused the Democrats of trying to aid the Iranians. “Iran must be as overjoyed at its prospects for passage as our friends around the world are dismayed,” he said.

Senate Democrats drafted their legislation in response to Reagan’s declaration earlier this week that a U.S. attack on an Iranian vessel in the Persian Gulf last Monday night did not constitute “imminent hostilities” under the terms of the 1973 War Powers Resolution.

A relic of the Vietnam Era that has never been willingly obeyed by any President and never formally invoked by any Congress, the resolution requires the White House to report to Congress within 48 hours after U.S. troops enter into imminent hostilities. Troops then must be withdrawn within 90 days unless Congress authorizes them to stay. The Administration contends that the resolution usurps the executive branch’s constitutional authority to conduct foreign policy.

Democrats objected to Reagan’s claim that their legislation would force him to withdraw U.S. forces from the gulf region. Unlike the War Powers Resolution, which would require a complete withdrawal, the Democratic measure would only halt U.S. escorts for Kuwaiti ships.

Policy Success Seen

In his statement, the President contended that his escort policy is beginning to succeed in the objective of bringing an end to the Iran-Iraq War. He added that this demonstration of commitment--”not vacillation and timidity”--had recently won the cooperation of U.S. allies.

“I want to make it clear,” he added, “that despite the damage this legislation could do just by its consideration, we will not abandon our strategic interests or our friends in the Persian Gulf.”

Likewise, Fitzwater cited U.N. Security Council efforts to end the seven-year war between Iran and Iraq as evidence that the U.S. policy in the region is “just now beginning to bear real fruit.” He cautioned against interpreting U.S. efforts to achieve unanimity in the Security Council as indications that the Reagan Administration is stepping back from its insistence that an arms embargo be imposed if a cease-fire is not achieved.