Bush Is Urged to Seek Peaceful Gulf Solution

Congressional leaders Tuesday urged President Bush to explore every peaceful option in the Persian Gulf before resorting to force, although the Administration is known to believe that the time is fast approaching when a decision about a military option must be considered.

Bush met with the congressional leadership four days before Secretary of State James A. Baker III is scheduled to travel overseas to consult with allies on the next move in the Persian Gulf crisis.

One of the topics on Baker’s agenda is a timetable for possible military action if sanctions do not force Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s army out of Kuwait, sources have said.

The President later in the day conferred at an extended, private meeting with his senior national security advisers.

The session with key members of the House and Senate reflected concerns in Congress over the pace at which the United States may be moving toward a bloody and costly war--raising the risk of a division between the White House and Congress as the President and other Administration officials appear to be signaling increasing readiness to use force.

The message from the Capitol to the White House, one well-placed Republican said, is to put on the brakes, in effect, and give the efforts to pressure Hussein through political, diplomatic and economic maneuvers a chance to succeed.

“That is the mood of not only the Congress but the American public,” he said. “This is something important for this White House, under siege, to understand. They’re hearing it; I’m not sure they’re understanding it.”

A White House official, meanwhile, expressed concern that what he called “a confluence of events” has fed the appearance that a war fever has blossomed in the White House over the past day or so. These included particularly harsh approaches toward Iraq in public comments by Bush and Baker, the U.N. Security Council vote demanding the resupply of Western embassies in Iraqi-controlled Kuwait and the meetings Tuesday at the White House.

“It’s had a steamroller effect,” the official said.

That impact was felt when Bush met for more than an hour Tuesday with senior members of the House and Senate, who pressed him to consult on major policy steps, although they offered no clear consensus on which ones to take.

Bush told his visitors, according to White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater: “I will continue to seek your advice and support as we proceed. We must all understand, however, that any such commitment must be hedged, given the unpredictable and dynamic circumstances of this crisis.”

Bush was also quoted as saying: “We will do our best, consistent with our common stake in seeing that nothing is done that would needlessly endanger lives or place U.S. interests in any greater risk.”

Baker’s trip will take him to Europe and the Persian Gulf, the State Department said Tuesday, and will include a meeting with Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard A. Shevardnadze in an undisclosed European capital Nov. 9 to discuss the gulf standoff and arms control.

The secretary’s trip reflects, in part, the Administration’s concern about the resilience of the international coalition lined up against Iraq, which includes a number of Arab nations.

The coalition already has withstood more strains than many outside analysts initially thought possible, most recently surviving the pressures caused by the Temple Mount shootings in Jerusalem earlier this month that left 20 Arabs dead and enraged the Arab world. But the long-term strength of the international assemblage remains in doubt.

At the same time, political analysts are warning that in a prolonged stalemate, the Persian Gulf conflict--already nearing its fourth month--will become steadily more unpopular with the American public.

U.S. officials have said that a new sense of urgency has been created not only by the prospect of flagging support, if the standoff drags on, but by the time required to reinforce troops and equipment if a military option is to be taken.

Analysts also note that the next several months are the period of the year most suited to military action in the Arabian desert. By some time in February, high winds and blowing sand could seriously undercut the American air power advantage.

All those factors seem to be pushing the Administration to act sooner rather than later. But the impetus toward action is powerfully counterbalanced by the desire to give peaceful options every chance before adopting a course that likely would lead to the deaths of thousands of American troops.

With the Administration unleashing a new burst of stern rhetoric, lawmakers are growing worried that “this is somehow a prelude to immediate military action,” said Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.). “People want to make sure that options are explored.”

Sen. William S. Cohen (R-Me.) said he believes that, although Bush’s patience is severely strained, it does not appear the nation is yet “at the near-break point.”

But given the long lead time needed to put a full-scale offensive into place, U.S. officials suggested that the decision will have to come soon. U.S. commanders would like to see any offensive completed before mid-February for reasons that involve both weather and religion.

A few weeks after the fierce annual windstorms begin lashing Saudi Arabia, the Muslim holy month of Ramadan begins. If the United States has control over the timing of a war, it likely would want to start considerably before this for fear of running into the bad weather and colliding with Muslim religious concerns, commanders said.

Currently, the desert climate is moderate for the region, with temperatures down to the mid-90s in the daytime and the 60s at night. But the coming winter windstorms will cancel out the temperature advantage, with winds so powerful that clouds of dust blow thousands of feet in the air, turning the sky black. The winds are known as khamsin-- a word derived from the Arabic word for 50 because that is how many days the stormy period generally lasts.

Having American troops still in Saudi Arabia during Ramadan, meanwhile, is a troubling prospect to some Saudi officials who fear that Hussein will use the sentiments arising during the holy period to stir up a new round of anti-Americanism in the Arab world.

During Ramadan, Muslims are forbidden to eat, drink, smoke or have sex during daylight hours. Traditionally, this means that night is a time of feasting and celebration and daytime is set aside for sleep.

In case of war, military officials fear, those restrictions could severely undermine the readiness of Arab forces. And any U.S. forces based with Saudi or other Muslim troops will be expected to honor the daytime fast, officials have indicated.

In a briefing to troops the other day, Navy Chaplain Stanley Scott, who oversees morale issues for all Marine ground forces in Saudi Arabia, warned that the Saudis “don’t take kindly to people who break Ramadan--they get a little torqued out of shape.”

“Out of respect, we probably should refrain from smoking and drinking and eating,” the chaplain said.

“The other one,” he added, referring to sex, “has gone away anyway, hasn’t it?”

Gerstenzang and Lauter reported from Washington. Staff writer Douglas Jehl, from Saudi Arabia, contributed to this report.