Advertisement

Bush’s Moves Spark Fears in Congress : Democrats: Leaders share worries that war may erupt during recess.

Share
TIMES WASHINGTON BUREAU CHIEF

Members of Congress expressed serious concern Friday that President Bush’s deployment of more than 200,000 additional troops in the Persian Gulf signifies a major change of strategy that could lead to war with Iraq.

With Bush himself and his top aides stressing that the United States may resort to a military attack if the Iraqis refuse to withdraw from Kuwait, members of Congress said they see the military buildup as a sign that the Administration is losing patience with economic sanctions and is preparing for offensive action.

So many Democratic members of Congress have begun raising questions about Bush’s policy that House Speaker Thomas S. Foley (D-Wash.) has planned a meeting in Washington next week to discuss the matter. He plans to return to the Capitol today from his home in Washington state.

Advertisement

Foley said a date has not been set for the meeting, but presumably it will take place before Wednesday, when Bush is to confer with congressional leaders on the Persian Gulf situation.

“I think we’re going to continue seeing more questions raised about this matter,” Foley said.

Democratic congressional leaders, who left Washington last week worried that war might erupt while Congress is in recess, made it clear that the new deployment has increased their fears. They urged Bush to consult more with Congress and to spell out his gulf policy more extensively to the American people.

Foley, though not declaring himself opposed to Bush’s course, stressed that his support for the President’s decision to send troops to the area in August “has been based on defensive operations--and it still is.”

Rep. William S. Broomfield (R-Mich.), ranking minority member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called the sending of a much larger force “a major change” in policy and said Bush should have consulted with lawmakers more to assure full congressional backing.

“The whole question is one of putting more pressure on (Iraqi President) Saddam Hussein,” Broomfield said. “But if you want the broadest support, Congress has got to be in on the takeoff as well as the landing.”

Advertisement

Broomfield said Bush’s failure to keep Congress better informed could undermine his gulf policy and pointed out that he and committee Chairman Dante B. Fascell (D-Fla.) asked Bush in an Oct. 26 letter to consult with Congress on any additional deployment of forces or any change in military mission.

Fascell said it is unlikely that Saddam Hussein can be “bluffed out” of Kuwait and “this means that we cannot keep increasing our forces in Operation Desert Shield unless we are ready, willing and able to use them in an offensive operation.”

A congressional source said that when Foley met with Bush two weeks ago to discuss the Persian Gulf crisis, he emphasized that, while Democrats backed his policy, the President could not necessarily count on the party’s support if the United States launches an attack on Iraq without clear provocation. In a telephone interview, Foley declined to confirm or deny that account.

Several Democratic members, speaking on condition that they not be identified, explained that members of Congress who have questions about Bush’s policy find themselves in an awkward position because challenging Bush’s move publicly might relieve some of the pressure on Hussein.

“Nobody wants to give comfort to Saddam Hussein,” one member said. “But some members would like to see this policy more fully debated in public.”

Rep. Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.), the House majority leader, said: “Democrats have supported the President’s policy and continue to do that, but what is needed is greater consultation with Congress and discussions with the American people so that, if the policy or underlying strategy is changing, people will understand that.”

Advertisement

Rep. Lee H. Hamilton (D-Ind.), describing the American people’s support for Bush’s policy as broad but “very thin,” said, “There’s a great deal of uneasiness about all of this. They do not want American casualties. They feel that very, very strongly.”

Advertisement