Mideast Welcomes U.N.-Iraq Pact

The oil-for-food agreement between Iraq and the United Nations was welcomed Tuesday across the Middle East, even by Persian Gulf states with the most to lose from an economically and politically revitalized Saddam Hussein.

Many analysts in the region saw the accord reached Monday as a sign that Iraq is back, despite denials from Western policymakers. Some believe it is now only a matter of time before all trade sanctions against the Iraqi regime are lifted and the country of 20 million again becomes a respected member of the international community.

“This agreement . . . represents a clear step forward toward lifting the suffering of the Iraqi people, while preserving their sovereignty and the integrity and unity of their lands,” said Egyptian Foreign Minister Amir Moussa, as quoted by the Middle East News Agency in Cairo.

The plight of Iraqis under the sanctions, imposed shortly after Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait and maintained to pressure Hussein to give up his secret weapons programs, had weighed heavily on many Arabs.

News footage of malnourished children and of hospitals that had run out of medicine seared consciences in a region that emphasizes the brotherhood of all Muslims. Knowing the methods of Hussein’s regime, most observers in the Middle East felt the sanctions hurt ordinary people far more than they did the president and his tightknit inner circle.

Even in the oil-rich Arabian Peninsula--the immediate target when Hussein invaded Kuwait--satisfaction that the humanitarian needs of Iraqis finally will be addressed appeared to outweigh the likely negative economic consequences of the decision. Oil producers in the gulf can expect increased competition, lower prices and reduced revenues when Iraqi oil starts reaching the world market over the next several months.

“From an Arab and a humanitarian perspective, we strongly welcome this agreement,” said Qatar’s Al Watan newspaper. Calling the deal a breakthrough, the newspaper said Iraqis have suffered too long, and it urged further steps to improve their predicament.

In Kuwait, where anti-Iraqi feeling runs high six years after Hussein’s occupation, there was a note of pragmatism to the acceptance of the deal--a feeling that a well-fed Iraq will be that much less likely to covet Kuwait’s riches again.

By solving part of Iraq’s humanitarian problem, the agreement will “lessen the possibility of their exporting violence,” said Jassem Saadoun, a Kuwaiti economist quoted by Associated Press.

Many others viewed the deal “as a first step for the Iraqi people to get relief . . . and they hope for more easing to follow,” said Tewfic Mishlawi, a Middle East analyst in Beirut.

According to Mishlawi, the accord provides Hussein with “a small opening to break the isolation of Iraq.”

There was some speculation that by agreeing to the U.N. resolution after years of delay, Hussein is making a fundamental reassessment of his intransigence toward the international community. Ahmed Nafei, a prominent editorial writer for Egypt’s Al Ahram newspaper, said in an interview that the deal could mark the beginning of improved relations between Iraq and the United Nations.

Hussein may eventually give in to all the U.N. dictates, allowing the sanctions to be lifted, if he believes his personal rule can be maintained, Nafei said.

George Hawatmeh, editor in chief of the Jordan Times in Amman, the capital, said the deal will have the effect of preventing any open rupture among the former Persian Gulf War allies by blunting calls from some coalition members for the lifting of sanctions. He cited Russia and France as two countries that would like to see normalized relations with Iraq.

“So this seems like a compromise between those who wanted to lift sanctions and those who did not,” Hawatmeh said. “The Iraqis will have to be content with this solution for a long, long time. This was a compromise to keep Iraq at bay.”

Another factor is that the “regime was not collapsing,” Hawatmeh said. Therefore, he suggested, why not “give his people some bread so they have a chance of toppling him”?

According to this argument, an Iraqi people reduced to thinking only about day-to-day survival would have neither the time nor the energy to think about a revolution.