U.S. Warns of Limits of Air Attack on Iraq Sites

Seeking to lower public expectations, Defense Secretary William S. Cohen warned Saturday that airstrikes against Iraq might reduce Iraqi President Saddam Hussein’s arsenal temporarily yet not topple him or force him to allow full access to U.N. weapons inspectors.

As Pentagon planners prepared for what could be the biggest assault since the Persian Gulf War, Cohen cautioned that “we shouldn’t overestimate” what military action can accomplish.

“Let’s not raise unreasonable expectations,” he said.

Cohen made his comments as Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin ordered a top Russian envoy to return to Iraq; Britain called for a new U.N. resolution that condemns Baghdad for breaching the terms of the 1991 Gulf War cease-fire; and U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright arrived in Jerusalem from London on a six-day European and Mideast tour to update U.S. allies on Washington’s intentions regarding Iraq.

The heightened activity indicates the scramble is now on to determine what course of action--diplomatic or military--will prevail to force Iraqi compliance with U.N. disarmament efforts.

Cohen’s statements at a Washington news conference suggest that the administration wants to prepare public opinion for the possibility that even an intensive, days-long air campaign could fall well short of its first goal--forcing a resumption of weapons inspections--and perhaps mark only another stage in the long and sporadically violent U.S.-Iraqi chess game.

Cohen renewed his declarations that any strike would be “substantial” and would have a “significant impact on [Hussein’s] ability to do things in the near future, and for some time to come.”

But, he said, “I don’t want to suggest that a military strike is in any way preferable to having unfettered access by U.N. inspectors” who could closely watch any attempts by Iraq to build U.N.-proscribed chemical or biological arms.

He acknowledged some of the reasons it will be difficult to eliminate Hussein’s chemical and biological weapons programs. He said the United States would want to avoid sites that are near concentrations of civilians and would take “great care” to avoid strikes that might release dangerous biological agents or chemicals into the air.

Although Cohen said no final plans had been approved, defense officials have suggested that airstrikes would probably last at least three days.

They have suggested that top targets would include: sites of chemical and biological weapons manufacturing and storage; troops and equipment of the Republican Guard; Iraq’s dozen-odd secret police organizations; the 250-plane Iraqi air force; and key elements of military infrastructure, such as communications and command-and-control sites.

Administration officials have made clear that the first goal of any strike would be to force the resumption of U.N. inspections of suspected Iraqi weapons-building sites--inspections that were interrupted last month.

But in recent days, as the United States has edged toward military action, foreign diplomats, independent analysts and some military officials have voiced doubts that bombs and cruise missiles could coerce Hussein into making a move he has fiercely resisted.

*

U.S. officials traveling with Albright said they had been informed that Viktor Posuvalyuk, Russia’s deputy foreign minister, will return to Baghdad in a last-ditch effort to avert military action against Iraq. But Washington officials are deeply skeptical that the special envoy will make any more progress than he did during a two-day mission last week.

After meeting with Albright in London on Saturday, British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook told reporters that Britain is taking the lead in crafting and promoting a toughly worded U.N. Security Council resolution about Iraq’s failure to allow inspectors full access to sites suspected of housing weapons of mass destruction.

In an attempt to look at other means to address the broader Iraqi situation, Cook also said, Britain wants a new formula worked out to expand the “oil for food” program that allows Baghdad to sell oil and use the profits to buy food and medical supplies for its people. U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is expected today to formally present the Security Council president with his suggestions for improvements in the program, which is the only reprieve that Iraq has from the toughest economic sanctions in the world.

The language of the British resolution could effectively give legal cover to the use of force if Iraq does not comply, U.S. officials say.

At the same time, the United States is making clear to all European and Arab officials with whom Albright is meeting that Washington does not need further authority from the world body to launch a military strike.

Although the Israeli-Palestinian peace process was to be a main focus for Albright in Israel on Saturday night and today, a strong subtext of her visit is to persuade Israel to keep a low profile during any military confrontation.

U.S. officials deny there is any “linkage” between the Iraq showdown and the peace process. However, the United States’ credibility and standing in the Arab world have been hurt by the lack of progress in the process after 10 months of a serious deadlock.

U.S. officials are also eager to be seen by the Arab world to be pressuring Israel on the peace process, which may make it easier for Albright to win backing for Arab support of or acquiescence to a strike against Iraq if diplomacy fails.

In the event of military action against Iraq, Pentagon officials have repeatedly ruled out the possibility of using a ground assault if airstrikes do not succeed.

At his news conference, however, Cohen repeatedly dodged questions about whether a ground invasion would be considered.

He said the United States would not seek to weaken the Iraqis so much that they would cease to function as a counterweight to their larger neighbor, Iran. That idea “was a factor in the Gulf War . . . and that still applies,” he said.

Cohen sought to ease jitters in oil markets over the possibility that hostilities could cut off the flow of oil from the region. The U.S. military “would do whatever is necessary to make sure that the flow of energy from that region is not interrupted,” he said.

Still unsettled is whether all U.S. allies in the region would allow the United States to use their air bases. Without them, the Pentagon could be limited to carrier-based aircraft.

In general, differences over the best course of action, the timing and longer-term strategy are diminishing as Albright and other U.S. officials present the U.S. case.

In recent days, Spain, Sweden and Germany have called on Hussein to comply with U.N. demands and have noted that “all options,” the euphemism for military force, are now open.

India and Iran, however, announced their opposition Saturday to the use of force.

In Baghdad on Saturday, 23 arms experts arrived to begin a five-day mission that will involve technical evaluations of Iraq’s missile warhead production.

The experts, including Americans, Russians and several Europeans, will try to determine where Iraq stands in dismantling warheads that are capable of holding chemical or biological agents.

*

Iraq has not accounted for up to 45 of the long-range warheads it is now banned from keeping. It also has not accounted for an array of ingredients that could make up deadly chemical agents such as VX gas, U.S. and U.N. officials say.

Iraq has also launched a new offensive to undermine the credibility of chief U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler.

“The Security Council should restrain this loose man, the talker, because an international employee must be balanced, speak very little and behave well,” said an editorial in the state-run newspaper Al Jumhuriya. “He should not be a reason to trigger a war.”

Richter reported from Washington; Wright, covering the Mideast and European tour by the secretary of State, reported from London. Times staff writer Marjorie Miller in Jerusalem contributed to this story.