Bush Says He Feels Sanctions Will Not Suffice

President Bush said Tuesday he doubts that the U.N. economic and military sanctions against Iraq will force Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to withdraw his occupying troops from Kuwait.

“I’ve not been one who has been convinced that sanctions alone will bring him to his senses,” the President said, while adding that the measures are “having some effect.”

“The best chance for peace is for him to understand that all means--all means--necessary . . . will be used against him,” Bush said. “This is not going to go on forever.”

The sanctions are the centerpiece of the international effort to bring the four-month-old occupation to an end short of warfare.

Others in his Administration have suggested previously that the sanctions would be insufficient, but Bush had not publicly expressed such doubts in the past.

The President’s statement is one more sign for Hussein that the United States will not be willing to let the economic pressure build on Iraq month after month in the hope that he will eventually back down.

Bush made the remark at a news conference during a 21-hour visit to Uruguay, his second stop on a five-nation, weeklong tour of South America. He was joined at the news conference by Uruguayan President Luis Alberto Lacalle.

The President offered no hint of opening a door to negotiations. He played down a report in a British newspaper that the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council--the United States, Britain, France, the Soviet Union and China--would offer Hussein a firm commitment against attack if he withdraws from Kuwait, allows the restoration of Kuwait’s government and frees the hostages Iraq holds.

“I’m not in a negotiating mood or anything of that nature,” Bush said, adding that he did not want his message of resolve to get “softened down.”

On Sunday, Secretary of State James A. Baker III said that if Baghdad withdraws fully from Kuwait, the United States will not take military action against Iraq.

The question of negotiating positions has arisen as the United States and Iraq prepare for an anticipated series of meetings involving Bush and Iraqi Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz in Washington, followed by Saddam Hussein and Baker in Baghdad.

Bush said he agrees with Baker’s statement Sunday that “we are not going to negotiate, short of the United Nations resolutions. We shouldn’t do that. We are not going to do that. And I hope we can put that to rest with this statement.”

Similarly, the President turned aside a question about whether he might try to make it clear in the talks with Iraq that he would like a resolution of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, which Hussein has tied to the gulf crisis. “I will not be endeavoring to do that,” Bush said.

Hussein has repeatedly sought to link the two issues in an apparent effort to split Arab nations from the U.S.-led international coalition that has lined up against him.

“The whole world knows Saddam Hussein has been trying for linkage, and in the talks we have there will be no linkage,” Bush said.

The President announced Friday that he is inviting Aziz to meet with him in Washington next week and is prepared to send Baker to Baghdad for a follow-up session with Hussein. That move won overwhelming support in the United States, with a Washington Post/ABC News poll made public Tuesday finding that 9 out of 10 people questioned were in support of such talks.

Iraq said Saturday it will take part in the meetings, although it has given no such formal notification to the U.S. government. A White House official traveling with Bush said the Administration was not yet worried about not receiving a formal acceptance.

Asked whether Hussein was trying to slow down the pace of events in the face of a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the use of all means necessary to end the occupation if the troops are not withdrawn by Jan. 15, the official said, “It wouldn’t surprise me. He’s full of surprises.”

In the news conference, which was focused as much on the Persian Gulf crisis as on Latin American issues, Bush was asked what he is doing to reduce the oil price increase that has followed the shut-off of Iraqi and Kuwaiti oil as a result of the gulf crisis. He and his aides have insisted that the additional oil deliveries from Saudi Arabia and other producers have kept sufficient supplies of oil on the world market.

The President said:

“All I can do is try to make clear as best I can as President that there is not an oil shortage today. Hopefully, some of those speculators will listen to that and look at the facts and see that that is true. In the meantime, countries are being devastated by the price that is driven through speculation or driven through fear.”

In Washington on Tuesday, Robert S. McNamara, defense secretary during the Vietnam War buildup, said the nation should have learned from that conflict about the need for congressional approval and public support before offensive action.

During testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, McNamara said: “Surely we should be prepared to extend the sanctions over a 12- or 18-month period if that offers an opportunity to achieve our political objective without the loss of American lives.”

He added that a troop rotation policy would prevent “time pressures which could force us into a war which otherwise could be avoided.”

But Sam H. Zakhem, former U.S. ambassador to the Persian Gulf state of Bahrain, differed in his testimony to the committee.

“Sadly, I do not think these sanctions by themselves will ever be able to accomplish our goals,” Zakhem said.

Historian Arthur Schlesinger Jr. told the committee that other nations should contribute more troops to the military force assembled in the gulf so that Americans make up no more than 50% of the total if war comes.

“Why are we always the fall guys, expected to do 90% of the fighting and take 90% of the casualties?” Schlesinger asked. “What’s the big hurry? Must we really send our troops to their deaths . . . because the medieval rulers of Saudi Arabia won’t like Americans hanging out too long in the Saudi desert?”

Opening hearings by the House Armed Services Committee, Chairman Les Aspin (D-Wis.) said: “Whatever we do, the country, the Congress and the President must do it standing on common ground.”

The panel heard Jerrold M. Post, a former CIA psychiatrist, describe Saddam Hussein as “a judicious political calculator, who is by no means irrational but is dangerous to the extreme.”

Post said that Hussein might reverse his present course if he can preserve his power and reputation without total capitulation or humiliation.

Later in the day, House Democrats adopted a policy statement saying Bush should take no military action against Iraq without prior approval from Congress, “except to protect American lives from imminent endangerment.”

The Democratic Caucus amended the non-binding resolution to include language supporting the President’s diplomatic initiatives in the gulf crisis before voting, 177 to 37, for the resolution.

Times staff writers William J. Eaton and David Savage, in Washington, contributed to this story.