PERSPECTIVE ON THE GULF CRISIS : An Agenda for Peace Waits to Be Written : Much of the Iraq-Kuwait dispute, along with other inter-Arab issues, can be resolved, but not in the din of saber-rattling.

After talking with Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and others in Baghdad during a humanitarian mission, from which I returned with almost 200 hostages, I am even more convinced than before that efforts for non-military solutions should not be abandoned. On the contrary, efforts toward a peaceful settlement should be increased.

Linking the future of Kuwait to lasting solutions of other regional conflicts is part of President Hussein’s thinking, but I cannot confirm that he regards such a link as a precondition for “sacrifices” he may have to make. No doubt, it is urgent to move in the direction of U.N. Resolution 660, which calls for the immediate and unconditional withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait. And President Hussein seems to understand by now that foreign hostages are no shield against the military option; in fact, their release is an indispensable prerequisite for a peaceful option.

Since the United Nations is not in a position to negotiate, and since powers from outside the region also lack the necessary positive image among Arab nations, there is good reason to support the idea of an immediate Arab summit. A timetable for the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait and their replacement with transitional forces from member states of the Arab League should be on the agenda for solving the gulf crisis; a plebiscite in Kuwait under U.N. auspices; harbor access for Iraq to the Persian Gulf; arbitration on the income from the disputed oil fields, and agreement between Iraq and Kuwait to consult on fair oil prices and quotas.

With respect to security and cooperation for the Middle East at large, lessons learned from the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe might nurture peace, provided the interests of all actors in the Middle East are properly taken into account. I found that the Iraqi leadership understood quite well the new post-Cold War international thinking on security issues. Indeed, they expressed interest in the Helsinki approach of negotiating the set of issues that might lead to peace in separate but interrelated “baskets.”

In our conversations, the Iraqi leadership acknowledged that the long journey toward peace in the Middle East can start only after Baghdad proves its willingness to compromise on Kuwait. They also understand that, in view of the grave conflicts from Cyprus to Afghanistan, there must be more on the agenda than Palestine, Lebanon and the gulf region. Further issues needing to be addressed include: how to accommodate the Kurdish people, who constitute one of the major ethnic problems reaching beyond existing boundaries; how to stop the regional arms race, especially the control of arms of mass destruction, and how to bridge the divide between the region’s rich and poor countries through the use of the considerable income from oil for economic development.

If the current military confrontation should lead to war, we can forget not only this agenda, but also any prospect of stability in the Middle East. The region is a powder keg filled with sophisticated and horrifying weapons of all kinds supplied by both East and West . One need only recall the last gulf war, in which more than 1 million people were killed, to imagine the kind of conflagration that might occur in the region again. And who can believe in the instant success of an American-led blitzkrieg if even the commanding U.S. generals don’t? Who can guarantee that a limited war will not escalate into a regional war that could destroy the oil fields and Israel, too?

While I agree that putting pressure on Iraq is warranted, I remember well the warning of the Palme Commission that any modern military buildup includes the risk of war by sheer accident.

Therefore, my advice to all parties involved: Give more time to let the U.N. sanctions work. Iraq cannot survive for long without commodity imports and oil exports. Iraq is not South Africa; its economic collapse will be within sight in months, not years.

In the meantime, all efforts should be oriented toward peaceful solutions. I sincerely hope that the endeavors by Soviet and Arab envoys will continue, and I am sure that the concerns of the American people will be heard in Washington.

Europe, too, certainly has a role to play, in a manner that corresponds to its increasing weight. The present level of European involvement is not sufficient proof of its solidarity in fulfilling the U.N. resolutions. But since the European Community has not acted jointly, for various reasons (British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is one of them), political initiatives should be taken by individual European countries that are in a position to lead the way for peace.