U.S. and Allies Consider Easing Iraq Sanctions

As an incentive for Iraq to end its confrontation with the United Nations over weapons inspections, the United States and its allies are considering “modest adjustments” to the international sanctions against Baghdad that may allow Iraq to expand its oil sales, a senior U.S. official said Monday.

In addition to possibly increasing the variety of humanitarian goods Iraq may buy through the special U.N. arrangement that allows Baghdad to swap oil for food, the concessions might include eliminating periodic reviews of that program.

The proposals, which Secretary of State Madeleine Albright discussed Monday by telephone from Saudi Arabia with the British and French before flying Monday to Pakistan, would give Moscow and Paris new leverage in their consultations with Baghdad--and could be a face-saving mechanism allowing Iraqi President Saddam Hussein to reverse course.

Over the weekend, the U.S. invited Russia and France to mediate the Iraqi crisis. The next phase of the showdown is expected to be dominated by their intervention.

But the United States, through its possible shifts in the Baghdad embargo, also wants to undercut the primary source of opposition worldwide to sustaining the U.N. limits on Iraq, the longest, most comprehensive sanctions in modern history.

The hardships of the Iraqi people after seven years of sanctions--including increasing malnutrition and shortages of medicine--have, in turn, prompted heightened criticism of Washington as the primary advocate of a tough embargo.

Speaking of the sanctions, imposed after Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, the senior official traveling with Albright observed of Hussein: “He exploits this issue in the Arab world and Europe and with the Russians, when we’re the ones who have been trying to improve it. Now we’re trying to improve that situation more.”

But Nizar Hamdoun, Iraqi ambassador to the U.N., called the U.S. proposal “a nonstarter” because it does not deal with Iraq’s major concern, which is “a quick end to the sanctions.”

“We want guarantees from the Security Council . . . that the sanctions will be lifted soon,” Hamdoun said at an impromptu news conference.

In a subsequent interview, Hamdoun shrugged off the Security Council resolutions that have warned Iraq that it must readmit U.S. inspectors expelled Thursday before there can be any discussion of lifting the sanctions, and he cited divisions within the council among the U.S., France and Russia over how to deal with Baghdad.

At the U.N. last week and in Europe and the Arab world this week, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tarik Aziz has repeatedly complained about U.S. meddling and delays and the inadequacy of the oil-for-food program. The Clinton administration has dismissed the accusations as an attempt by Baghdad to divert attention from its obstruction of U.N. weapons inspectors to the emotional issue of the embargo and its human toll.

While Iraq had been allowed to buy--but not sell oil to pay for--basic foodstuffs, medical supplies and educational materials under terms of the embargo imposed in 1990, Hussein used his national treasury to sustain his power rather than feed his people. He then launched a masterful public relations campaign about Iraqi hardships, U.S. officials say.

Mounting international pressure led the U.N. to pass Resolution 986, creating the oil-for-food swap program more than two years ago. It was put forward by American and British envoys to give the Iraqis a way to generate new sources of foreign exchange so they could buy more goods; the program also undercut Iraq’s propaganda.

Baghdad is now allowed a controlled sale of $2 billion worth of oil every six months to buy the basic foodstuffs, medicine and other vital humanitarian goods outside Iraq. After squabbling with Baghdad over the terms, the U.N. program took effect last year.

“We have always taken the view that we want to do as much as we can to make sure sanctions do not unduly or unfairly affect the people of Iraq,” the senior U.S. official said Monday. “We took the view that $4 billion a year is a reasonable approach to resolve the humanitarian problem.”

But Iraq has since complained that it is not allowed to generate enough income to buy what is needed and that supplies have been deliberately delayed by the U.S.

*

Three areas of the oil-for-food program could be adjusted, the senior U.S. official said.

The allies will review the income, based on oil sales, that Iraq is raising to see if it is sufficient to pay for items needed by Iraq’s 20 million people.

They also will reexamine the definition of what goods qualify as humanitarian supplies and possibly consider other categories, including “civilian” needs, the senior official said without providing details.

Furthermore, officials will consider the possibility of leaving the program in place indefinitely rather than reviewing it every six months.

As now set up, a sanctions committee reviews every item purchased under the humanitarian goods category. Applications are rejected for one of three reasons: The items are not strictly humanitarian, such as industrial spare parts; they have military applications, such as pesticide sprays or nozzles that could be used in the production of chemical weapons; or they have been purchased from past violators of the sanctions.

So far, more than 90%--or 1,447 of 1,526 applications--have been approved, the official said. Only 47 have been blocked; 32 are on hold due to incomplete or problematic applications.

Pressed on whether the changes in the oil-for-food program would play into Iraq’s hands, the official said the United States was not conceding anything. “We are guilty only of caring about the Iraqi people,” he added.

But the U.S. deliberations, especially after a week of tough talk against Baghdad, underscore the still wide gap between Washington and its allies who want to see sanctions removed sooner than the Americans do.

*

As now being proposed, any adjustments in the oil-for-food program would not take effect until Hussein’s regime complies with U.N. resolutions and allows weapons inspectors, including Americans attached to the United Nations, to return to Iraq.

In Washington, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen insisted that the United States was not offering Hussein concessions. “We are not seeking any deal in order to insist that he comply with his obligations,” he said.

And President Clinton said Monday in an appearance in Wichita, Kan., that diplomatic efforts to settle the crisis “must be backed by our strong military.”

Meanwhile, U.S. officials traveling with Albright dismissed Hussein’s seeming offer this weekend to let the inspection teams return, but only if their composition reflected the makeup of the Security Council, a change that would presumably reduce the number of American inspectors.

The administration said it would reject any attempt by Hussein to determine the nationality or number of U.N. inspectors allowed in Iraq, both because of the implication for American participation and because of the precedent it would set in giving Iraq influence.

Times staff writers Craig Turner at the United Nations, Norman Kempster in Washington and Jonathan Peterson in Wichita contributed to this report.