THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Wednesday, September 4, 1996 TAG: 9609040012
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A10 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 57 lines
The latest action by Saddam Hussein and reaction by the United States is a reminder that the Persian Gulf War was undertaken to achieve limited objectives and left behind unresolved problems.
The Persian Gulf states are a vital American interest chiefly because of the oil they possess. The interest of the United States and its allies is in keeping the flow of that vital resource under the control of market forces.
As long as a balance of power exists in the region, that is assured. Saddam's capture of Kuwait and the threat he posed to Saudi oil fields upset that balance. There was a risk that huge resources would fall into the hands of an aggressive and unscrupulous despot. Rolling him back became necessary.
Since the Gulf war, the goal has been to keep the now less-powerfully armed Saddam contained and to force him to live up to the terms of the peace agreement. In allying himself with one Kurdish faction, attacking another and violating a no-fly zone, Saddam has tested the bars of his cage.
The president's response is reasonable: to reimpose expanded no-fly restrictions; to strike targets posing a threat to our fliers; and to permit no relaxation of economic sanctions.
Going much further would be a mistake, however, and some recent rhetoric has been troubling. Clinton said the message to Saddam Hussein was ``when you abuse your own people, or threaten your neighbors, you must pay a price.''
Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole appeared to call for an even greater commitment including ``decisive action by the United States to curtail the power of Saddam Hussein, and the end of his defiance of the international community and of his atrocities against the Kurdish minority in Iraq.''
But Saddam has always abused his own people. Short of deposing him, how can he be made to stop? Certainly if international sanctions are to mean anything, they must be enforced. But caging Saddam while putting as few Americans as possible in harm's way is about all we can reasonably accomplish. Clinton has successfully walked the tightrope so far. Great caution should be exercised before taking larger steps.
The crosscurrents are complex. Our western allies from the Gulf war, with the exception of Britain, are conspicuous by their absence. The Saudis have acquiesced in our actions but can be counted on for no more. They fear that lining up with the West against fellow Arabs could be hazardous to their health.
One Kurdish faction is aligned with Iraq, another with Iran, making the current dispute more than the abuse of an internal minority. It is the latest round in an ongoing rivalry.
The Turks side with Iraq in this case since they too oppress a Kurdish minority and stand to profit from a renewal of Iraqi oil shipments.
In short, the United States finds itself uncomfortably alone and fairly limited in what it can achieve without the kind of a massive commitment the American electorate would flinch from.
We can keep Saddam penned within his own borders, control his air space and limit his ability to sell oil. That we are doing. Reforming his character, toppling him from power, protecting his minorities and improving his neighborhood are beyond our power. Both the president and Mr. Dole would do well to keep it in mind. by CNB