FLARE-UP IN THE GULF : NEWS ANALYSIS : ‘Slap on the Wrist’ Called Too Light; Now Iraq Is Problem for Clinton

Wednesday’s allied air strike against Iraq may briefly discourage Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from provoking the West, but it has not altered the underlying dilemma for Washington--or for the incoming Clinton Administration--analysts said Thursday.

Although the raid showed Hussein that he cannot get away with further violations of U.N. restrictions, it did not send the signal that some hard-liners had hoped: that Hussein must be overthrown before Iraq can get back on its feet.

As a result, these analysts said, the determined Iraqi dictator is likely to continue his unrelenting campaign to regain Iraq’s sovereignty, relying on a combination of initial concessions--and later provocations--to charm or cajole the West into relaxing its restrictions.

The latest allied response is “a minimalist response that says to Hussein, ‘Look, you get out of line in the next few days, (and) you get more of it,’ ” said Phebe Marr, a Washington-based specialist in Middle Eastern affairs.

But beyond that, “the outlook is murky,” Marr said. “It’s not clear how Saddam is going to respond” to the new allied slap, or whether the past three weeks’ sparring has really changed very much.

Laurie Mylroie, an analyst at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, agreed. “The raid is going to stop Saddam for a while, but it doesn’t address the basic problem,” she said. “It didn’t affect Saddam’s hold on power.”

Jeffrey Record, another Washington-based political analyst and a hawk on the Iraqi issue, argued that the Bush Administration should have stuck to its earlier plan to hurt the forces that are keeping Hussein in power--his security forces and the Republican Guard.

American officials had indicated initially that they were planning to bomb Iraqi airfields, its security apparatus and elite infantry units. But they finally targeted only a handful of missile sites--apparently to avoid charges of overkill and to preserve Bill Clinton’s options after he takes office.

But Record contended that the last-minute switch was a mistake. “The basic issue here is that as long as you continue to nibble away at the symptoms of the problem, you’re going to be in this tit-for-tat situation. You’re going to be playing his game,” he said.

“We slapped him on the wrist, and we’re right back where we started,” said Don Snider, military analyst at the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies. “The most interesting issue is what was accomplished? Nothing has really changed.”

Amatzia Baram, professor of Middle East history at Haifa University in Israel, predicted that the minimal nature of the allied raid may temporarily bolster Hussein’s position at home by enabling him to portray himself as a hero, who defied--and survived--the allied raid.

Baram said that Hussein’s latest provocations were an attempt to win over the increasingly disgruntled Iraqi army by openly defying the West. Hussein also had sought to establish new ground rules with the Clinton camp--increased sovereignty in return for better behavior.

Key government analysts agreed that the sovereignty issue is an important one for Hussein because it is a key to his regaining full standing among the security forces and the Iraqi populace.

“The reason he chose to challenge the legality of the ‘no-fly zone’ that the allies imposed was very, very deliberate,” one government analyst said. “He wanted to emphasize the sovereignty issue--to get back his ability to do whatever he wants at home.”

But after Wednesday’s relatively limited raid, “I think his position has strengthened now,” Baram said. “It will be more difficult (for the Iraqi army) to rise against him for a while until things get very bad later on.”

Analysts generally agree that the unrest in Iraq is a result of the increasing impact of the West’s economic sanctions, which have seriously crimped the country’s once-comfortable standard of living and have made day-to-day life difficult for ordinary Iraqis.

The cumulative squeeze from the Western sanctions is bringing about “the slow strangulation of Iraq as we know it,” Snider said. That makes the situation “even more urgent than before,” he argued. “The nation (Iraq) is suffering severely.”

Some analysts said they fear that the attack poses some risk of backfiring--both by hardening Hussein’s resolve and by strengthening the position of Iraq’s rival, Iran.

“Now, he’s more isolated,” Christine Helms, a Washington-based Middle East analyst, said of Hussein. “The broader question is what happens now in the region? If Iraq disintegrates, the stability in the region will be reduced.”

Secretary of State Lawrence S. Eagleburger predicted Thursday that Hussein will pose a new challenge within a month of Clinton’s inauguration--a move that he said could bring on another Western military response. “I can’t answer whether it (Wednesday’s raid) is enough (of a) deterrent or not,” he said. “But I think that he will probably try again next month. I could make you a bet that he will; he’ll try to push Clinton within the first month or so.”

Times staff writer Melissa Healy contributed to this article.