U.S. Must Be Free to Attack Iraq, Baker Says

Secretary of State James A. Baker III insisted Wednesday that the Bush Administration must be free to attack Iraq without getting specific approval from Capitol Hill, although he promised to consult frequently with congressional leaders over U.S. policy in the Persian Gulf.

“Our chances of settling (the gulf crisis) without resort to the use of force will be much improved if the opposition knows that we have got (military power) there and that we would not be reluctant to use it,” Baker told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

But most members of the committee, long one of the most dovish in Congress, made it clear that they oppose the use of military power except in response to new aggression from Iraq.

Going far beyond the requirements of the Vietnam-era War Powers Resolution, several lawmakers said the Administration should not consider offensive action without asking Congress for a formal declaration of war.

Committee members also expressed alarm at the prospect that President Bush might initiate combat during the 10-week congressional recess expected to begin later this month.

“I, for one, am not giving advance approval for any unilateral U.S. military action,” said Committee Chairman Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.).

In an interview released Wednesday, U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar also discussed the military option. The German weekly magazine Stern quoted him as saying that if U.N.-imposed economic sanctions against Iraq do not work, military action “would be perfectly legitimate”--should the U.N. Security Council so decide.

Baker told the Senate committee that the Administration is prepared to keep congressional leaders informed probably in secret. But he said it would be a big mistake to stage the sort of full-scale debate that would be required before Congress could be expected to authorize military action. That sort of discussion would tip off Iraqi President Saddam Hussein about U.S. operational plans, he added.

“You are not going to surprise Saddam Hussein; you are going to surprise the American people,” Sen. Terry Sanford (D-N.C.) said. “I understand about operational security. I don’t want to know where or when, but I want to know if.”

Baker responded: “If we have a big, long debate up here about whether--we’re going to have to talk about where and if and what with and who with.”

He also said the Administration objects to creating a special congressional committee to oversee the Administration’s gulf policy during the recess on Capitol Hill.

“It’s pretty hard for me to say that the President would not, under any circumstances, take any action or do anything that he, as commander in chief, felt was necessary to protect American citizens, for instance, without first having some sort of consultation procedure or process formally in place,” Baker said.

“It’s hard for you to give us a blank check,” he said. “We know that. But we can’t give you one either.”

At the same time, Baker said the Administration may soon return to the U.N. Security Council to seek authorization for the use of force. But he said that such a move would involve stand-by approval only--in effect, the sort of blank check he conceded that the Administration cannot get from Congress.

“We would be looking for authority to move in the future, if necessary,” he said.

However, he said, Washington would resist any effort to put under U.N. command the multinational force in the gulf. He said that, although 25 nations have committed units to the force, the U.S. contingent is by far the largest.

“We are very concerned about putting the lives of our American men and women over there in the hands of someone other than an American military commander,” Baker said.

On related topics:

Baker acknowledged that the run-up in the price of oil since the start of the crisis has resulted in windfall profits to Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf oil producers far in excess of the amount that they have agreed to contribute to the U.S.-sponsored coalition against Iraq. But he said he will seek additional “burden-sharing” payments if the crisis continues into 1991.

He said that if Hussein withdraws peacefully from Kuwait and thus keeps his formidable army intact, the Administration will ask the U.N. Security Council to continue the arms embargo against Iraq and to impose tough new sanctions intended to prevent Baghdad from developing nuclear weapons or expanding its arsenal of chemical arms.