Iraq Rebuffs Bush on Date for Talks as Well as Agenda : Gulf crisis: A White House spokesman says the rejection proves that Baghdad is not serious about discussing the U.N. demand that it pull out of Kuwait.

The Iraqi government rejected all dates offered by President Bush for talks in Baghdad and made it clear Saturday that, in any case, Iraq does not want to talk about the same things that Washington does.

A communique from the Revolutionary Command Council, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s inner circle, accused Bush of trying to impose a schedule on Iraq. The statement said that, in talks with Washington, Iraq would not discuss any U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an Iraqi pullout from Kuwait.

“Iraq had rejected that resolution and would not deal with its details (in any talks),” the communique said. It repeated Iraq’s position that the talks must encompass a variety of Middle East issues, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

On learning of this development, an Administration spokesman in Washington said it shows that Iraq is not serious about U.S.-Iraqi talks.

Bush has repeatedly emphasized that any Baghdad-Washington talks undertaken at his initiative would be limited to the U.N. demand for the unconditional withdrawal of Iraq from Kuwait, which it invaded Aug. 2.

Washington stressed that limitation again Saturday.

A top aide to Secretary of State James A. Baker III declared that the proposed meeting between Baker and Iraqi President Hussein, if it occurs, will be brief and blunt--and will not be allowed to turn into real negotiations.

“We’re going to make it as clear as we can to Saddam Hussein (at any meeting with Baker) we are serious about enforcing the Security Council resolutions,” Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence S. Eagleburger said on Cable News Network’s “Evans and Novak” program.

“Saddam Hussein will then have to make up his own mind on what he’s going to do about it,” Eagleburger said.

He said any Baker-Hussein session is likely to last “five minutes to five hours”--and contacts are unlikely to continue for more than a day or two. He stressed that the discussions would not include negotiations.

“If you say ‘no negotiations’ and you mean it, then there aren’t any negotiations,” Eagleburger said.

A scheduled meeting this Monday in Washington between President Bush and Iraqi Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz was declared “on hold” Friday by Bush, who rejected the Jan. 12 date Iraq had proposed for a meeting in Baghdad between Baker and Hussein.

Iraq effectively ruled out any possibility of the Dec. 17 meeting when it announced Saturday that Aziz would not fly to Washington as tentatively planned and proclaimed that “Iraq alone” would set the date for any visit by Baker to Baghdad.

In Washington, a spokesman for President Bush, who was spending the weekend at Camp David, Md., said the Iraqi statement proves that Baghdad is not serious about the proposed talks.

“We have communicated to the Iraqis that mutually satisfactory dates should be set,” spokesman John Herrick said from the presidential retreat. “Today’s announcement is just a reaffirmation of Iraqi unwillingness to deal seriously with the issue.”

Hussein’s date of Jan. 12 for the Baker visit was turned down by Bush because it is only three days before a U.N. deadline of Jan. 15 for Iraq to withdraw from occupied Kuwait or face the threat of military attack by international military forces deployed in the Persian Gulf. Washington considered the Iraqi scheduling a stall and asked for Baghdad talks no later than Jan. 3.

Saturday’s communique of the Revolutionary Command Council insisted that Bush had offered Iraq only two dates for the Baghdad meeting, not a dozen, as Bush on Friday said he had suggested.

Late Saturday, government spokesman Latif Jasim tried to soften the negative tone of the council’s communique.

“Despite the disagreement, we still hope the Administration responds positively to our proposal,” he said. “We want to solve this date (problem).”

When asked if Iraq would budge on its scheduling, Jasim responded: “I cannot decide this. Since we gave your President Bush the freedom to pick the date, we have the freedom to pick a date for Baker.”

U.S. officials here expressed doubt that talks would take place. “I don’t know where we go from here,” an official said. “But they know our phone number.”

The row with Washington put the brakes on Iraq’s efforts to open talks with U.S. allies in Europe and the Arab world. A meeting with representatives of the 12-member European Community depended on talks first taking place in Washington.

On Saturday, Iraqi diplomats in Baghdad were approaching European ambassadors to ask whether the EC might reissue an invitation, even if the talks with Bush evaporated.

Iraqi officials had also hoped that the opening to the Bush Administration would encourage Saudi Arabia to open talks with Baghdad. Saudi Arabia is host to hundreds of thousands of U.S. and allied troops.

The snag in U.S.-Iraqi talks gave rise to a renewal of warlike propaganda in Iraqi newspapers and on television. “The pack of villains, if it does not give up its arrogance, will find that a pack of (Muslim) believers is ready for military confrontation,” warned the government paper Al Jumhuriya.

Television broadcast a scene of Hussein riding a white horse while reviewing troops, followed by film showing legions of marching soldiers and units chanting praise to the Iraqi strongman.

In a meeting with a visiting Islamic delegation, Hussein also lambasted Persian Gulf allies of the United States for alleged debauchery and pledged that, although Iraq does not seek war, it would fight if attacked.

In Washington, House Majority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) renewed Democratic complaints that America’s allies are not pulling their financial weight in the Persian Gulf effort, which he said will cost almost $37 billion next year.

“Allied support has been woefully inadequate,” Gephardt told reporters at a news conference. “It’s been too little and too slow in coming.”

Gephardt and Rep. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said the major foreign financial backers of the anti-Iraq coalition--Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Germany, Japan and South Korea--have pledged to provide only $10.6 billion, or 29% of the total cost.

Japan has delivered only 21% of its promised $4 billion, they said. And while Saudi Arabia has promised $10 billion for the operation, the desert kingdom already has received a windfall of at least $43.8 billion from rising oil prices, they charged.

“We’re putting up a red flag today,” Gephardt said, warning President Bush that he must be more aggressive in securing financial backing from America’s allies if he wants Congress to approve additional spending.

Gephardt and Schumer also said the allies should commit more troops to the operation. “I’ve told the President that if body bags go back to the United States, they’ve got to go to London, Paris and Cairo as well,” Gephardt said.

Williams reported from Baghdad, and McManus reported from Washington.