Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 20, 1991 TAG: 9102200412
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: ROBIN WRIGHT LOS ANGELES TIMES
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
But an Iraqi withdrawal that permits Saddam to survive as head of a still-powerful military machine could leave the United States and its allies with a messier and even more volatile situation in the Persian Gulf than it faced before the war began, according to U.S. officials, foreign envoys and Middle East specialists.
While Iraq's agreement to withdraw unconditionally before a ground war starts would probably spare hundreds, even thousands of lives, a settlement of the kind being pressed by the Soviet Union and Iran could be even more costly in the long run.
"There's absolutely no question that Saddam's survival would make this incredibly messy, from a security standpoint, from a political standpoint, from virtually every standpoint you look at," said a leading U.S. military analyst.
"Many of the nascent plans for post-war Middle East presumed tacitly that we'd be dealing with a different government in Baghdad - maybe still Baathist [the ruling political party], but not led by Saddam," he said.
In this view, permitting Saddam to remain in power with significant portions of his military apparatus intact could leave the door open to potentially endless problems - including overt or covert aggression against his vulnerable but strategically vital neighbors.
Such fears are not limited to the Bush administration. All of the mainstream European and Arab members of the coalition share the view that the survival of a well-armed government led by Saddam would be a destabilizing force for years to come - its potential for stirring trouble inhibited only by the serious economic problems it will face as a result of allied bombing.
"If they get a withdrawal, the Bush administration will be very embarrassed," said a ranking European envoy, discussing the flurry of diplomatic activity triggered by the Soviet Union's peace initiative over the past weekend.
Agreed Riad Ajami, a political economist with intimate knowledge of Iraq, "Saddam has a longer view of history than others believe. He believes that he can survive today and come back another day, with more resources and more opportunities."
Indeed, President Bush's cool reaction to the secret Soviet peace plan in public comments Tuesday apparently reflected fears in his administration that Saddam could re-emerge as a threatening powerhouse in the region and that the expensive international response to his invasion of Kuwait would have been virtually for naught.
Analysts cited these elements in the potential for a resurgence:
> Five weeks of relentless air assaults have destroyed more than 1,400 Iraqi tanks and killed untold troops, but the surviving remnant comprises an army still larger and better equipped than those in almost all of Iraq's neighbor nations.
Saddam's masterful manipulation of internal politics, his total control of the media and the absence of a cohesive opposition force to challenge him could keep him in power.
Most of the coalition's official objectives would have been achieved under the Soviet peace formula, but the survival of the Baath party regime with a powerful military machine would almost certainly mean a prolonged, expensive - and potentially controversial - U.S. presence in the gulf.
"Saddamism," the appeal to Palestinians and the region's dispossessed, could remain a radical political influence throughout the Middle East.
Asked what capabilities the Iraqis would retain if the war ended today, Lt. Gen. Tom Kelly, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday: "If he got everything out that he still has in the ball game, he would still be a very powerful military force."
Ironically, the biggest constraint on Iraq if the fighting ends now will be its crippled economy, experts said.
"If the world were to put its mind to it in a concerted way, given the financial leverage, it would be possible to constrain Iraq for a long time to come," said James Placke, a former U.S. envoy in Baghdad.
by CNB