Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, March 8, 1991 TAG: 9103080489
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: AL KAMEN and R. JEFFREY SMITH/ THE WASHINGTON POST
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Long
Administration officials continue to hope Saddam will be overthrown by factions within the ruling Baath party or the military, and regard a coup by either group as more likely than other potential political upheavals to produce a stable government in Iraq.
But the current uprisings of Shiite fundamentalists in the south and Kurdish opponents in the north - which so far have constituted the bulk of the opposition to Saddam's regime - are being looked on with increasing concern, several officials said.
Recent U.S. intelligence reports indicate the dissident fundamentalists may be using light weapons smuggled across a porous border from Iran, a Shiite-run nation that fought an eight-year war against Iraq, several officials said. The reports, which also state that some key opponents of Saddam have apparently returned to Iraq from exile in Iran, indicate some Iranian fundamentalists may be trying to manipulate the post-war situation in Iraq, the officials added.
U.S. interests could be challenged if the Iraqi Shiites gain control and establish close links with radical, traditionally anti-Western elements in Iran, a U.S. government analyst said on condition that he not be named. Roughly 60 percent of Iraq's population are Shiite Muslim, 20 percent are Sunni Muslim, and 20 percent are Kurds, according to Rear Adm. Mike McConnell, intelligence director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Much of the current unrest has been attributed to longstanding Shiite resentment of Sunni control through Iraq's Baath party, headed by Saddam.
Asked how the Bush administration would regard an Iraqi government controlled by Shiites or Sunnis, a senior U.S. defense official said, "We'd have reason to be uncomfortable with both."
The idea of an Iraq ruled by Iranian-backed Shiite fundamentalists also does not sit well with some of the Arab nations that were allied with the United States in the war. Senior diplomats from the Arab countries most strongly opposed to Saddam were nonetheless delighted this week by news that so far he appears to have survived the Shiite insurrections, according to one of the diplomats.
"We all want to get rid of Saddam," the diplomat said, "but we are not interested in seeing Iraq disintegrate. That would work against stability."
Defense Secretary Dick Cheney on Thursday reiterated the administration's position that the United States would be pleased "if Iraq had a new government," but he acknowledged there could be worse things than Saddam's survival in power. "The breakup of Iraq would probably not be in U.S. interests," he told reporters at the Pentagon.
Opposition to Saddam has so far not coalesced into a civil war, but has been manifested largely in scattered insurrections by "people taking advantage of the loss of law and order," according to a U.S. government analyst.
Some soldiers and small military units returning from Kuwait have become involved in the unrest, but have not banded together to form an organized military threat, the official said. These soldiers have also been the source of arms used in the unrest, the official added.
But other U.S. analysts and Western and Arab diplomats warned in interviews that if a civil war develops, it could draw Syria, Turkey or especially Iran to stake out territorial claims in Iraq, thus leading to wider conflict and years of instability.
"My worry is the Lebanonization of Iraq," Italian Foreign Minister Gianni DeMichelis said this week in an interview. Such fragmentation of the country, he added, could result in years of "general anarchy" there and further destabilize the Persian Gulf region.
The Bush administration's response appears limited so far to hoping for the best outcome. State and Defense department officials insist the administration will not get involved in internal Iraqi affairs. "I'm not sure whose side you'd want to be on," Cheney said Tuesday.
Exiled opposition leaders have complained that U.S. officials have declined even to sit down with Kurdish and other dissident Iraqis if only to listen to their ideas about a new post-war order in Iraq. "We are not in touch with them," acknowledged one U.S. official. "The Saudis are in touch, but it is not at our behest."
The reason for the general lack of U.S. government contact with Iraqi opposition groups, the official said, "is that we can't bank on them to displace Saddam Hussein. We are banking on the military" or Baath leaders "to pull him out" of power as the unrest worsens.
Another reason, U.S. officials said, is that none of the opposition leaders appears to be a viable alternative to Saddam, either individually or as a coalition. "There is no Khomeini-like figure waiting to take power," one U.S. official said, referring to the late, radical Iranian ruler swept into power by civil unrest in 1979.
In addition, American officials say they are concerned that consultations with any particular opposition group might be seen as favoring one group over another and compromise that group's prospects for gaining power in a region where appearing to be pro-U.S. can be a liability. Moreover, U.S. officials say a dearth of solid information about the political situation in Baghdad has also made them wary about getting too involved in Iraqi politics.
by CNB