U.S. Shift on Cambodia Assailed as Inadequate by Senate Democrats : Foreign policy: Critics say the new policy comes up short in several key areas.

The Bush Administration pleaded for bipartisan support of its new Indochina policy Friday, but ran up against a series of Democratic critics who complained that the new U.S. overtures to the governments of Vietnam and Cambodia do not go far enough.

At a congressional hearing, several Democratic senators urged the Administration to end its strict trade embargo against Cambodia and to open up talks with the Vietnam-backed Cambodian regime headed by Prime Minister Hun Sen. Some of the Democrats also renewed calls for a cutoff in U.S. aid to the two non-Communist resistance groups that are fighting Hun Sen’s government.

“We must put an end to our economic embargo of Cambodia, which is causing untold damage to the Cambodian people and which also acts to prevent contact with Cambodia,” said Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, one of the Democrats.

The hearing suggested that the efforts by Secretary of State James A. Baker III and others to defuse congressional criticism of U.S. policies in Indochina may not be successful, unless further changes are made in those policies.

On Wednesday, Baker announced that the United States will enter for the first time into talks with Vietnam over the future of Cambodia. In addition, he said, the United States is withdrawing recognition from the rebel coalition headed by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, the former Cambodian ruler, because this coalition includes the dreaded Khmer Rouge.

More than 1 million people were killed or died of starvation and disease when the Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia between 1975 and 1978. The secretary of state made clear that the overriding goal of U.S. policy in the region now is to prevent the Khmer Rouge from returning to power.

Baker was responding to mounting congressional pressure. Over the past few weeks, a growing number of Congress members--apparently reacting to classified intelligence briefings--have voiced concern that the Khmer Rouge are making rapid gains inside Cambodia and could conceivably be on their way back to power.

Last month the Senate Intelligence Committee voted to cut off the longstanding U.S. aid to the two non-Communist Cambodian resistance groups. And a week ago, Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell (D-Me.) managed to win support from leading Democratic and Republican members of the Senate Intelligence Committee for a letter calling upon the Administration to change course on Indochina.

On Wednesday, Baker embraced some of the changes in policy suggested by Mitchell. At the same time, however, he and other Administration officials urged a continuation of U.S. aid to the non-Communist resistance groups.

Moreover, the Administration refused for now to enter into direct talks with the Phnom Penh regime, apparently because the Administration hopes to persuade Hun Sen and other leaders to step down and form some new coalition with non-Communist forces.

On Friday, Richard H. Solomon, the assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, urged Congress to close ranks with the Administration on Cambodia policy.

“The United States can only be successful in helping shape developments in Cambodia if we have strong support, and bipartisan support, in the Congress and from the American people,” Solomon told a Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee.

But among Democrats, only Sen. Charles S. Robb (D-Va.), the son-in-law of the late President Lyndon B. Johnson, who first lost congressional support for American Indochina policy, seemed willing to go along. Robb said members of Congress should “try to achieve some sense of bipartisanship in our foreign policy.”

Edmund S. Muskie, the Maine Democrat who was secretary of state in the Jimmy Carter Administration, called for a lengthy list of further changes, including a cutoff in aid to the non-Communist resistance, direct talks with Hun Sen and an end to the U.S. trade embargo against Cambodia.

Other Democrats, too, questioned why the United States is still unwilling to talk with the Phnom Penh regime.

“Why are we willing to talk to Vietnam about Cambodia, but not to Cambodia about Cambodia?” asked California Sen. Alan Cranston.

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry said he questioned whether Baker’s announcement amounted to “a cosmetic change in U.S. policy that will permit fingers to be pointed, laying blame for a Khmer Rouge victory, rather than truly laying the groundwork for a peaceful resolution of this conflict.”

In response, Solomon told the Democrats that if Congress cuts off U.S. aid to the non-Communist resistance groups in Cambodia, “we would totally undercut their position and our own credibility.” He said the U.S. aid is necessary “to provide the Cambodian people the alternative of an election with other than Communist options.”