Time - Man of the Year/Time_Man_of_the_Year_Compact_Publishing_3YX-Disc-1_Compact_Publishing_1993.iso/moy/081092/08109927.000

Text File | 1993-04-08 | 6KB | 119 lines

                                                                                IRAQ, Page 30

The Other Player


Bush's political future may depend on how he handles the taunting
challenge of Saddam Hussein

By J.F.O. MCALLISTER/WASHINGTON -- With reporting by Dan Goodgame
and Bruce van Voorst/Washington and William Mader/London


    Seventeen months after defeating Saddam Hussein in
battle, George Bush now finds his future intertwined with that
of the Iraqi dictator. Both men are fighting for their political
survival. And each realizes that his fate depends partly on how
well he can outmaneuver the other.

    As a distant enemy, Saddam loves Bush. By keeping U.N.
inspectors in search of weapons documents out of the Agriculture
Ministry for 18 days, then allowing them inside only after
insisting that no Americans could be on the team, Saddam was
able to portray himself as a leader on the comeback trail,
tenacious and triumphant even against a superpower foe. Senior
U.S. and British officials believe that one reason Saddam
provoked the showdown was to assert his authority after
uncovering a coup plot two months ago that resulted in 200
executions. If Saddam can embarrass Bush and contribute to a
Republican defeat in November, the Iraqi President will exact
delicious revenge and score another propaganda coup to
dishearten potential rivals at home.

    And Saddam has his uses for Bush. The U.S. President tried
to drum up political support during the 1990 midterm elections
by demonizing Saddam as "worse than Hitler," and has sought to
take advantage of the latest confrontation. During the
Agriculture Ministry dispute, the White House released photos
of midnight strategy sessions held by the President and his
advisers, thus reminding voters whose steady hand steers the
ship of state.

    Further face-offs seem inevitable. Iraq will continue to
try to undermine the U.N. sanctions that hobble its economy;
the U.S. and its allies will insist that Iraq bow to
international law. In such a charged atmosphere, war by
miscalculation cannot be ruled out. Nor can war by design. Some
Clinton aides grimly await their "October surprise" -- a
confrontation with Saddam that could rally the country around
Bush and give him a boost at the polls on Election Day.

    But open hostilities, even limited to allied air strikes,
would be perilous for both leaders. Saddam could not be sure his
luck would hold again against Kurds, Shi`ites and his own
disgruntled generals -- not to mention U.S. smart bombs. Bush
faces a more complex set of inhibitions. Saddam has been playing
a brilliant game of "cheat and retreat," chipping away at the
sanctions without driving the allies to retaliation. He is not
likely to hand Bush the kind of flagrant breach that would spur
a unanimous vote for war among U.S. allies. Washington is
prepared to go it alone, says a senior Bush adviser, but "we've
gone to a lot of effort to construct a world where we could get
the civilized community to agree on moves to deal with outlaws.
To the extent we do things unilaterally, we destroy that which
we're trying to build."

    Attacking Iraq could also be messy. Bush would prefer to
use unmanned Tomahawk cruise missiles. But he would probably
have to send in aircraft as well, and U.S. pilots could be
killed or taken prisoner. Saddam could retaliate with the
several hundred Scuds he is believed to possess, attacking
Israel in the hope that it would strike back and thus strain
Washington's ties to Arab allies like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.

    According to Bush's campaign strategists, even a victory
over Iraq would probably lose votes by underscoring the
President's devotion to foreign policy at the expense of the
pocketbook issues that matter most this year. Renewed Persian
Gulf fighting, says a campaign official, promises to be "a
lose-lose proposition for us. It could turn out badly, and we'd
look incompetent. And even if it turned out well, a lot of
people might think our priorities are misplaced."

    Most Saddam watchers believe that he does not want to risk
a suicidal death grip with Bush. Saddam's leadership since
Desert Storm has been a case study in guile, ruthlessness and
careful timing. The clash over the Agriculture Ministry is the
fifth time the allies have had to cock their guns to ensure
compliance with U.N. sanctions; each time in the past Saddam
backed down. "He is trying to nickel-and-dime us until he can
erode the sanctions and regain his sovereignty," says Phebe Marr
of the National Defense University in Washington.

    But his maneuvering room is shrinking. The allies are
determined now to rein him in lest the U.N. lose credibility and
Saddam be tempted by further adventures. They plan to insist
that Americans serve on future inspection teams, to spotlight
every Iraqi evasion of U.N. resolutions, and to boost aid to
Kurds and exiled opponents of Saddam. This week the Security
Council is expected to take up a resolution permitting military
strikes unless Baghdad stops attacking Shi`ites in the south.
The strategy, says a U.S. diplomat, is to "keep Saddam in his
box."

    Bush may not seek a fight, but neither is he likely to run
from one. If Saddam continues to flout the sanctions, Bush
might send in the bombers and electoral consequences be damned.
In foreign affairs, unlike domestic policy, Bush is not scared
of going against public opinion. He did so repeatedly in the
Gulf War, and in the end the public followed his lead. In this
dangerous dance, Saddam should not count on Bush's taking the
expedient way out.