U.S. Would Hit Iraq Hard Despite the Likely Costs

If Iraq does not back down in its confrontation with the United Nations, the U.S. game plan calls for taking substantial military action--even at the cost of some diplomatic setbacks and limited American casualties--in order to reassert U.N. authority, destroy key military props supporting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and affirm principles for the post-Cold War world.

The United States has not yet given up on diplomacy, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright told Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat on Sunday during the fifth stop of her European and Mideast tour. Senior U.S. officials still think there is a chance Hussein may cave at the last minute, as he did in November on the issue of allowing U.S. weapons inspectors in Iraq to carry out their work.

But the Clinton administration now thinks the Iraqi leader intends to provoke repeated crises that at some point will force Washington to unleash the vast air power assembled in the Persian Gulf region, senior U.S. officials say.

If Washington does not respond, the U.N. Security Council and U.N. weapons inspectors will become “a joke” and the credibility of the world’s lone superpower will be “laughed at,” ranking U.S. officials are telling allies and members of the council.

If Hussein does not bend, U.S. strategy is not only to target key military sites but also to put in place a post-strike program that would strengthen and potentially broaden the U.N. mandate inside Iraq. In addition, it probably would aim to expand the two U.N.-imposed “no-fly” zones over northern and southern Iraq to prevent Iraqi flights over the entire country.

Although final decisions depend on events over the next few weeks, the United States may press to “reconstitute” the U.N. weapons inspection team after military intervention to make it more effective as it searches for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, U.S. envoys are telling Security Council members.

The measures are designed to deal with the immediate problem by forcing Hussein to comply with U.N. resolutions that compel Iraq to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, and by adding steps that would help prevent future violations, the U.S. officials said. A punitive strike on Iraq--focusing on Republican Guard units, Defense Ministry sites and secret facilities making or hiding banned weapons--would not stop until Hussein agreed to comply.

But the strategy also would address the wider U.S. goal by weakening Hussein’s security apparatus and power base as well as his ability to threaten neighbors. In a pivotal speech in March, Albright announced what had long been implicit--that the United States will not support the lifting of economic sanctions until Hussein either introduces democracy or is replaced.

Finally, the U.S. game plan seeks to affirm the broader lessons that Operation Desert Storm, the 1991 U.S.-led military campaign that evicted Iraqi troops from Kuwait, attempted to teach Baghdad: that aggression against Iraq’s neighbors would not go unpunished and that the development or use of unconventional arms--long-range missiles and nuclear, chemical and biological weapons--invites a tough military response.

As the countdown continues, the U.S. also is putting in place a plan in case Baghdad chooses to respond militarily against Israel or Persian Gulf countries, the U.S. officials said. During the Persian Gulf War, Iraq fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel, killing at least two people, and about 40 missiles against Saudi Arabia, killing at least 29, including 28 U.S. soldiers.

Albright, speaking Sunday at a news conference in Jerusalem, said: “Let me say to the people of Israel in no uncertain terms, as I will say to the people of Saudi Arabia: The United States stood with you when Saddam Hussein attacked you [during the Gulf War]. . . . The United States stands with you in the face of Saddam’s latest threat today.

“We are committed to helping them in any way that we can if they in some way should be attacked. . . . Our response will be swift and forceful,” she said.

Already in place for Israel are a hotline linking the U.S. and Israeli defense ministries and a shared, 24-hour early warning system. U.S. monitoring facilities also alert Israel to a missile launch from anywhere in the region toward any target. And Israel has the U.S.-made Arrow antiballistic missile system, according to Pentagon officials.

A “strong contingency plan” already has been drawn up to protect Israel, U.S. envoys have told allies and U.N. members.

Further measures will be discussed during Albright’s stops in the Gulf states this week and during a tour of the region by Defense Secretary William S. Cohen beginning later this week.

The steps are designed to prevent or minimize “spillage”--civilian casualties or damage in third countries--if Iraq opts to retaliate against U.S. allies, U.S. officials say. But the measures also are designed to convince other parties, particularly Israel, not to get involved--and not to widen the conflict and its consequences.

The critical unknown in the U.S. game plan is the degree of Arab support, particularly in the Gulf. Ironically, some of the states most threatened by Iraq are also most worried about the longer-term political fallout from and public reaction to military action.

The United States gained the full support of Kuwait during a meeting later Sunday between Albright and Kuwait’s emir, Sheik Jabbar al Ahmed al Sabah, after she flew to Kuwait City from Jerusalem.

“She feels that as a result of these assurances, the Kuwaiti government will be with us if it comes to the use of force,” a senior U.S. official traveling with Albright said Sunday night.

The key outstanding issue is Saudi Arabia, where what is in effect a power shift underway from ailing King Fahd to Crown Prince Abdullah may temper Saudi enthusiasm for bold U.S. action.

There were indications Sunday that Albright may not get full cooperation from the Saudis. A senior Saudi official who requested anonymity told Associated Press on Sunday that his nation will not allow its territory to be used as a staging ground for attacks on Iraq, even if the Security Council approves such attacks.

The U.S. has more than 4,000 troops and dozens of warplanes at bases in Saudi Arabia.

“The use of [Saudi] bases is not the key,” a senior U.S. official said Sunday. “We’re confident we’ll be able to do whatever we need to do. What we want is political support. It would be hard to take on Saddam Hussein without at least passive support from the Saudis.”

The U.S. would settle for a statement that “all options are open,” which has become the favored euphemism for a willingness to at least tolerate the use of force, the official added. Albright is scheduled to travel today to Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

But Washington is prepared to absorb public criticism in Gulf states and the wider Arab world.

The administration is counting on those Arab states either forgiving or forgetting differences with U.S. strategy, as happened with previous, limited airstrikes against Iraq.

The next two to three weeks will determine the final aspects of the U.S. game plan. During that period, the administration expects frantic activity as key players scramble to convince Baghdad to comply with U.N. disarmament efforts, senior U.S. officials are telling allies.

France announced Sunday that it is dispatching Bertrand Dufourcq, secretary-general of the Foreign Ministry, to Baghdad with a stern warning that Iraq must allow weapons inspectors into all sites, including eight disputed areas that the Iraqis say are presidential compounds.

Viktor Posuvalyuk, the Russian deputy foreign minister and a former ambassador to Iraq, arrived in Amman, Jordan, on Sunday en route back to Baghdad for his second attempt in less than a week to persuade Hussein to comply with U.N. resolutions.

U.S. officials are already predicting other Russian efforts. Moscow is probably holding in reserve Foreign Minister Yevgeny M. Primakov, another former ambassador to Baghdad, for another try, they said.

The other focus point will be at the United Nations, where Britain is spearheading an effort to pass a new resolution condemning Iraq for material breach of earlier U.N. cease-fire resolutions. But U.S. officials believe that Russia may veto a resolution that appears to nod at a military strike.

At the United Nations on Sunday, Secretary-General Kofi Annan proposed expanding the current agreement allowing Iraq to sell $2 billion of oil every six months to buy desperately needed food and medicine, allowing Baghdad instead to sell about $5 billion worth of oil. Washington supports a “modest” expansion of the U.N. provision, but nothing that seems to reward Baghdad, Bill Richardson, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., said Sunday at the World Economic Summit in Davos, Switzerland.

“They deserve no sanctions relief. . . . We don’t want to give any carrot. They deserve nothing,” he said.

Robin Wright reported from Kuwait City and Michael Parks, the editor of The Times, from Davos, Switzerland.