Partial Pullout Not Enough in Gulf, U.S. Says

In a preemptive attack on possible Iraqi peace overtures, Secretary of State James A. Baker III said Tuesday that the United States would accept no “partial solutions” to the Persian Gulf crisis that would leave Saddam Hussein with anything to show for his invasion of Kuwait.

At a State Department news conference, Baker acknowledged that Baghdad has hinted it might negotiate about possible Iraqi withdrawal from most of Kuwait in exchange for control of a disputed oil field, two offshore islands or other concessions.

But Baker said the United States would not “succumb to the siren song of a partial solution to this crisis.” He said President Hussein “should not in any way be rewarded for his aggression.”

Although President Bush and other officials have made it clear from the start of the crisis that Washington wants nothing short of total Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait and a return to power of the emirate’s exiled government, Baker’s remarks were the most unequivocal so far in refusing to even consider the possibility of negotiations.

By ruling out the sort of split-the-difference deal-making that has become his trademark, Baker seems to have left the world with only three possible outcomes to the crisis.

One, international acquiescence to the annexation of Kuwait, seems to be out of the question. That leaves just two alternatives: steadily increasing political and economic pressure to force Hussein to withdraw unconditionally, or use of military force to drive the Iraqi army out of Kuwait.

Baker spoke a few hours after Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev announced in Moscow that he was sending his top Middle East specialist, Yevgeny M. Primakov, to Paris, Rome and Washington in search of a political solution. Primakov had just returned from Baghdad, where he said his conversations with Hussein left him with “cautious optimism” about the prospects for a peaceful settlement.

But a senior U.S. official said no one in Washington expects Primakov to bring a peace initiative when he meets with Bush on Friday. And Baker insisted that Moscow has never suggested appeasement of Hussein.

“Foreign Minister (Eduard A.) Shevardnadze has remained as solid as the United States on the issue of . . . no partial solutions,” Baker said. “ . . . I think the Soviet Union is still committed to full implementation of the (U.N.) resolutions.”

Baker said the aim of American diplomacy is to draw the economic and political noose tight enough to preclude the use of force. But he made it clear that nothing in this strategy requires--or even permits--negotiations with Iraq.

“We are engaged every day quite actively, diplomatically in Washington, in New York at the United Nations, and in foreign capitals, in search for a peaceful and political resolution to this crisis as opposed to a military or forceful resolution,” Baker said.

But he dismissed suggestions--from Jordan’s King Hussein, some American peace groups and other sources--that the United States is missing a chance for a diplomatic solution by refusing to take advantage of Iraqi hints at possible peace talks.

“I hope no one is judging the pace of our activity from the standpoint that we are unwilling to participate in a search for partial solutions,” Baker said. “We are indeed unwilling to participate in a search for partial solutions.”

Baker said Saddam Hussein has signaled “some interest in a negotiated arrangement that would enable him to claim benefits from his unprovoked aggression against a small neighbor.”

Shortly after the Aug. 2 invasion, Hussein suggested a Middle East package deal that would require Israel to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza Strip and Syria to pull out of Lebanon in exchange for Iraq leaving Kuwait.

“Since that time, we have seen some suggestions that would indicate that other things are negotiable as far as Baghdad is concerned: . . . Bubiyan Island, access to the gulf and things like that,” Baker said. “These are the kinds of things that we say, if we negotiated, that . . . we’d be permitting an aggressor to profit from his unprovoked aggression.”

Bubiyan is one of two Kuwaiti islands that command the approaches to Iraq’s only port on the Persian Gulf; the other is Warba. Baghdad has long coveted both islands.

In addition, there have been indications that Iraq might settle for total control of a disputed oil field that straddles the Iraq-Kuwait border.

In recent weeks, U.S. officials have suggested that if Iraq withdraws unconditionally from Kuwait and restores the deposed emir to his throne, Washington would have no objections to Kuwait negotiating with Iraq about grievances that preceded the invasion. This would seem to open the door a crack to a possible secret deal between Hussein and the exiled emir in which Iraq would withdraw its forces, ostensibly without conditions, in exchange for later negotiations in which Kuwait would agree in advance to make certain concessions.

But Kuwait’s government-in-exile on Tuesday ruled out conceding any territory to Iraq in any settlement.

“We will never give up any part of our country, not even one inch,” Sheik Saad al Abdullah al Sabah, the crown prince, said at a news conference in Jidda, Saudi Arabia.