Allies’ Unity Buoys U.S. Amid Iraqi Defiance

U.S. officials huddled Sunday to ponder their response to Iraq’s latest refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspections, amid signs that they may find it easier this time around to build an international front against Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

Saturday’s swift U.N. Security Council condemnation of Hussein’s announcement, coupled with unusually strong statements from European capitals, pointed to a more united front than the allies achieved during last winter’s standoff with Iraq, analysts said.

President Clinton, in an interview with the American Urban Radio Network, called Hussein’s latest challenge “a clear violation of the commitments that he made, a clear violation of the U.N. Security Council resolutions. From my point of view, we should keep all our options open, examine the nature of the action and where we are, and then do what’s best for the integrity of the United Nations and the . . . security interests of the people of the United States.”

As a first step toward a unified response, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright conferred by telephone with British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook and French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine. She was also scheduled to speak with her Russian counterpart, Igor S. Ivanov.

“Clearly, Iraq has escalated its confrontation with the world through its threat to halt cooperation with U.N. inspectors, and this posture has left even Iraq’s erstwhile allies with little to say in support,” said State Department spokesman James P. Rubin. “So we’re heartened by a growing unity within the Security Council against the position taken by Iraq.”

Added White House spokesman Barry Toiv: “We are consulting with our allies and others with a direct stake in the situation. All options remain on the table.”

Generally agreeing with the flavor of Rubin’s comments, U.S. and European analysts said the allies regarded Hussein’s latest stance--a blanket refusal to cooperate with weapons inspectors--as far more serious than his decision last winter to place only so-called presidential buildings and palaces off limits to U.N. inspectors.

The earlier confrontation divided the United States and its allies, most of which were reluctant to contemplate military action. It ended when U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan negotiated the inspectors’ return.

“This is much more brazen on the part of the Iraqis,” said French defense specialist Francois Heisbourg, ex-director of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. While the French government had not yet issued any detailed response to the latest crisis, there was no hesitation in its Security Council vote Saturday.

“Iraq is displaying a different level of noncooperation than before,” he added.

Moscow, which earlier this year refused to back any tough action against Hussein, also issued stronger words.

“We are counting on Baghdad scrupulously weighing up once more the negative consequences of this move, which could seriously exacerbate the situation in the region anew,” the Russian Foreign Ministry declared, according to Reuters news service.

Sunday’s reaction to Iraq’s defiance also stood in sharp contrast to the near-silence in Western capitals when Hussein acted to restrict the movements of U.N. inspectors last summer. Refusal to confront the Iraqi leader then led U.S. arms expert Scott Ritter to resign, charging that “Iraq is winning its bid to retain its prohibited weapons.”

A senior U.S. official, who asked not to be named, said Sunday that the lack of action then might now work in Washington’s favor as it moves to mobilize international support for a strong response.

“We wanted to increase the odds that Iraq, not the United States, would be the one on the defensive in the next crisis,” the official said.

The arms inspections began after the 1991 Persian Gulf War to ensure that Iraq had no capability to produce nuclear, chemical or biological weapons or long-range missiles. An international group of more than 100 people works for the U.N. program.

In Washington, reaction to Hussein’s latest challenge was predictably sharp.

Defense Secretary William S. Cohen warned that Iraq could face punitive airstrikes unless it immediately resumes cooperating with the U.N. inspectors.

“All options are still on the table,” Cohen said, acknowledging that the use of American air power “has always been an option that we could pursue.”

Cohen added that the Clinton administration hopes not to have to act unilaterally.

“We prefer to act through our allies, and hopefully that will be the case if we have to take action at all,” he said.

Cohen made his remarks at Andrews Air Force Base near here after scrubbing a three-nation security trip to Asia over the mid-Pacific so that he could return to Washington for consultations with Albright, National Security Advisor Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger and other senior military and intelligence officials. Later Sunday, he met at the White House in a 2 1/2-hour session.

Clinton, in Baltimore addressing a church service, did not attend the afternoon meeting but was later briefed by Berger.

“The president will want to sit down as early as tomorrow to work on the next step in how to respond,” said Toiv.

Speaking on NBC-TV’s “Meet the Press,” House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) predicted bipartisan congressional support for a tough response to Hussein’s latest challenge.

“If the president and the U.N. and our defense people say that the right thing to do here to deal with this is military strikes, I think he’ll have overwhelming support in the Congress, from almost every member of the Congress,” Gephardt said. “This has to be dealt with swiftly and efficiently.

“This is a case that has to be backed up, if it’s necessary, by military power, and I think the American people will support that,” he added.

The Pentagon said Sunday that the United States has nearly 30,000 uniformed personnel in the Gulf region and an array of hardware that includes the aircraft carrier Dwight D. Eisenhower and 14 other combat ships, seven of which are capable of firing Tomahawk cruise missiles.

“There are also 172 U.S. aircraft there,” said Pentagon spokesman Anthony Cooper.

Despite the unusually strong, broad-based international reaction to Hussein’s latest moves, there were no signs in the comments from several senior Iraqi officials in Baghdad that he might back down.

“We are not afraid from threats or any other action,” Deputy Prime Minister Tarik Aziz said. “We are not gambling, and we are not seeking confrontation. We are just protecting our rights.”

Earlier, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan used similar language, stating, “Iraq rejects the latest U.N. Security Council statement and will not back down.”

In its statement Saturday, Iraq said its refusal to cooperate with the inspectors will last “until the United Nations looks at the issue in an honest and positive way, leading to Iraq’s right to the lifting of the unjust sanctions” imposed on Baghdad by the U.N. after Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

U.N. efforts to find evidence of Iraqi nuclear, biological or chemical weapons programs have developed into a years-long game of cat and mouse between Hussein and the international community.

Just two months ago, a senior Iraqi scientist now living in the West, Khidhir Hamza, published a lengthy article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists charting how Hussein had hoodwinked International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors during a decades-long effort to develop nuclear weapons.